THE  GEORGE  HUNTINGTON  WILLIAMS  MEMORIAL  LECTURES 

ON 

THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  GEOLOGY 
VOLUME  ONE 


ARCHIBALD   GEIKIE 


(Beorgc  IHuntineton  IKHUHame 
flDemorial  Xectures 

ON 

THE  PRINCIPLES  OF  GEOLOGY 

VOLUME  ONE 


THE  FOUNDERS  OF  GEOLOGY 


BY 


SIR  ARCHIBALD  GEIKIE,  F.  R.  S.,  D.  C.  L. 

N> 

Director-General  of  the  Geological  Survey  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland. 


BALTIMORE 

THE  JOHNS   HOPKINS  PRESS 
1901 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 


The  present  publication  is  the  first  of  a  series  of  vol- 
umes, containing  lectures  by  eminent  geologists  on  The 
Principles  of  Geology,  to  be  published  under  the  auspices 
of  the  Geological  Department  of  the  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity, as  a  tribute  to  the  memory  of  Dr.  George  Hunt- 
ington  Williams,  late  Professor  of  Inorganic  Geology,  who 
died  July  12,  1894.  The  lectures  are  provided  by  the 
generosity  of  Mrs.  George  Huntington  Williams  who  thus 
desires  to  offer  to  the  students  of  the  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity and  to  the  wider  circle  of  workers  in  this  and  other 
countries  the  latest  conceptions  of  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  geological  science.  With  this  end  in  view,  inves- 
tigators of  distinction  will  be  asked  to  visit  Baltimore  from 
time  to  time  to  lecture  before  the  students  of  the  Univer- 
sity and  invited  guests  from  other  American  institutions. 

Two  such  courses  of  lectures  have  already  been  given, 
the  first  in  April,  1897,  by  Sir  Archibald  Geikie,  F.  R.  S., 
Director-General  of  the  Geological  Survey  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland,  and  the  second  in  April,  1900,  by  Professor 
W.  C.  Brb'gger  of  the  University  of  Christiania,  Norway. 

George  Huntington  Williams  was  born  in  Utica,  New 
York,  January  28,  1856.  He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Robert 
Stanton  and  Abigail  Obear  (Doolittle)  Williams,  whose 
ancestry  was  of  the  sturdy  Puritan  type,  the  grandparents 
of  both  having  emigrated  from  New  England  toward  the 
close  of  the  eighteenth  century.  His  immediate  ances- 
tors were  men  of  intellectual  vigor  and  prominent  in  the 
affairs  of  the  community  in  which  they  lived.  Surrounded 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


in  his  youth  with  the  refinements  which  an  educated 
family  life  can  give,  Williams  spent  his  school  days  in 
Utica,  passing  through  the  various  grades  of  the  public 
schools  and  finally  graduating  with  valedictory  honors 
from  the  Utica  Free  Academy.  In  the  autumn  of  1874 
he  entered  Amherst  College,  graduating  in  the  class  of 
1878.  Systematic  and  conscientious  in  every  detail  con- 
nected with  his  school  and  college  life,  he  then  formed 
habits  of  mind  which  characterized  his  maturer  years. 
In  a  remarkable  degree  the  youth  was  father  to  the  man. 

After  spending  the  greater  portion  of  the  year  succeed- 
ing graduation  as  an  advanced  student  at  his  Alma  Mater, 
he  left  in  July,  1879,  to  continue  his  studies  in  Germany. 
Going  first  to  Gb'ttingen,  at  the  opening  of  the  winter 
semester,  he  came  under  the  influence  of  Professor  Klein 
which  had  much  to  do  with  the  mineralogical  trend  of  his 
future  work.  The  following  year  he  entered  the  Univer- 
sity of  Heidelberg  where  the  great  teacher  Professor 
Eosenbusch  was  drawing  to  his  laboratory  those  who  were 
anxious  to  enter  the  comparatively  new  domain  of  micro- 
scopical petrography.  It  was  here  that  the  young  geolo- 
gist acquired  the  exact  methods  of  microscopical  investi- 
gation which  so  largely  characterized  his  later  work.  At 
the  close  of  the  second  year  under  his  distinguished 
teacher,  Williams  received  in  December,  1882,  the  degree 
of  Doctor  of  Philosophy,  his  thesis  dealing  with  the  erup- 
tive rocks  of  the  region  of  Tryberg  in  the  Black  Forest. 

Dr.  Williams  returned  to  America  at  the  close  of  1882, 
and  in  the  following  March  accepted  the  position  of  Fel- 
low by  Courtesy  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  University.  A 
year  later  he  became  a  member  of  the  academic  staff  with 
the  title  of  Associate  in  Geology,  which  position  he  held 
until  1885  when  he  was  made  Associate  Professor.  In 
1892  he  became  Professor  of  Inorganic  Geology.  Upon 
him  devolved  the  organization  of  the  department  of 


Introductory  Note 


geology,  and  the  high  efficiency  which  it  attained  owed 
much  to  his  conception  of  what  such  a  department  in  a 
university  should  he. 

From  the  beginning  of  his  service  at  the  University  Dr. 
Williams  directed  his  attention  to  a  study  of  Maryland 
geology,  and  more  especially  to  the  Piedmont  area  lying 
to  the  west  of  Baltimore.  Important  problems  in  rock 
metamorphism  here  presented  themselves  and  as  a  result 
of  this  study,  numerous  contributions  were  made  to  scien- 
tific journals  in  this  country  and  in  Europe.  Later  his 
investigations  embraced  the  South  Mountain  district  with 
its  wonderful  exhibition  of  ancient  volcanic  rocks  of 
both  acid  and  basic  types.  A  publication  upon  this  dis- 
trict and  its  wider  extension  along  the  eastern  border  of 
the  continent,  made  but  a  short  time  before  his  death, 
was  one  of  Dr.  Williams'  most  important  contributions  to 
geological  science.  Much  of  the  work  in  the  Maryland 
area  was  done  under  the  auspices  of  the  U.  S.  Geological 
Survey,  with  which  organization  Dr.  Williams  was  closely 
connected.  He  valued  these  opportunities  not  only  as  a 
field  for  personal  research  but  also  as  nature's  laboratory 
in  which  young  men  might  be  trained  in  the  most  exact 
methods  of  scientific  investigation.  From  the  very  first 
his  enthusiasm  and  his  lucid  interpretation  of  geological 
science  drew  students  to  him,  while  his  devotion  to  their 
interests  made  a  close  bond  of  sympathy  which  lasted  be- 
yond their  student  days. 

While  engaged  primarily  in  the  study  of  the  geology  of 
Maryland,  Dr.  Williams  took  up  other  problems  during 
his  absence  from  Baltimore  in  vacation  time,  collecting 
data  and  materials  that  formed  the  basis  for  more  extend- 
ed examination  in  the  laboratory.  Among  these  import- 
ant studies  may  be  mentioned  his  investigations  of  the 
greenstone-schists  of  the  Menominee  and  Marquette  re- 
gions, an  important  work  on  the  metamorphism  of  erup- 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


tive  rocks,  and  also  his  study  of  the  Cortlandt  series  of  the 
Hudson  with  their  contact  phenomena. 

Professor  Williams  was  always  deeply  interested  in 
methods  of  teaching,  and  the  needs  of  his  class-room 
work  were  kept  constantly  in  view.  This  led  to  the  prepa- 
ration of  a  number  of  important  papers  along  these  lines 
and  also  to  his  text-book  on  the  Elements  of  Crystallog- 
raphy. 

Professor  Williams  was  an  effective  speaker  and  his  pub- 
lic addresses,  whether  before  audiences  at  his  own  uni- 
versity or  elsewhere,  did  much  to  extend  the  knowledge  of 
that  branch  of  geology  to  which  he  had  given  his  life. 

The  interests  of  the  Johns  Hopkins  University,  which 
he  served  during  a  period  of  nearly  twelve  years,  were 
ever  before  him,  and,  whenever  the  opportunity  offered, 
he  sought  their  advancement  with  a  loyalty  which  was 
cordially  appreciated  by  all  friends  of  the  institution. 

As  one  of  his  biographers  has  said,  "  The  output  of  his 
academic  work  as  embodied  in  his  students  has  stamped 
a  value  upon  it  which  cannot  now  be  estimated,  but  its 
success  in  the  eyes  of  those  who  were  watching  from  po- 
sitions of  close  association  is  expressed  in  the  memorial 
minute  adopted  by  the  board  of  trustees  and  the  academic 
staff  of  the  University,  in  which  they  bear  testimony  to 
'  his  alert,  inquisitive  observation;  the  clear  judgment  and 
sound  reasoning  which  he  brought  to  the  interpretation  of 
what  he  saw;  his  excellent  power  of  statement,  whether 
with  voice  or  pen;  his  cultivated  appreciation  of  literature; 
the  energy,  hopefulness,  and  enthusiasm  which  he  carried 
into  his  work  and  imparted  to  his  associates;  his  genuine 
individual  interest  in  his  students;  the  friendliness  and 
helpfulness  of  his  relations  to  his  colleagues,  and  his  readi- 
ness to  cooperate  in  every  worthy  undertaking/  " 

WM.  BULLOCK  CLABK. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

OF  THE  PUBLICATIONS  OF  GEORGE  HUNTINGTON  WILLIAMS 


Glaukophangesteine  aus  Nord-Italien :  Neues  Jahrlmch  fttr  Min.,  etc.,  1882, 
vol.  11,  p.  202. 

Die  Eruptivgesteine  der  Gegend  von  Try  berg  im  Schwarzwald.  Inaugural 
dissertation:  Ibid.,  Beilage-Band,  vol.  il,  1883,  pp.  585-634. 

The  synthesis  of  minerals  and  rocks.  Review  of  Fouque  et  Michel-Levy's 
"  Synthese  des  min^raux  et  des  roches" :  Am.  Chem.Jour.,  vol.  v,  p.  127. 

Relations  of  crystallography  to  chemistry :  Am.  Chem.  Jour.,  vol.  v,  p.  461. 

Barite  crystals  from  De  Kalb,  New  York :  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  29, 
March,  1884,  p.  61. 

Preliminary  notice  of  the  gabbros  and  associated  hornblende  rocks  in  the 
vicinity  of  Baltimore :  Ibid.,  30,  April,  1884,  p.  79. 

Note  on  the  so-called  quartz-porphyry  of  Hollins  Station,  north  of  Balti- 
more :  Ibid.,  32,  July,  1884,  p.  131. 

On  the  paramorphosis  of  pyroxene  to  hornblende  In  rocks :  Am.  Jour.  Sci., 
vol.  xxviii,  October,  1884,  pp.  259-268. 

Notice  of  J.  Lehmann's  work  on  the  origin  of  the  crystalline  schists:  Proc. 
Am.  Assoc.  Adv.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxiii,  p.  405. 

Review  of  J.  Lehmann's  "Entstehung  der  altkrystallinen  schieferge- 
steine  " :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxviii,  November,  1884,  p.  392. 

Dykes  of  apparently  eruptive  granite  in  the  neighborhood  of  Baltimore : 
Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  38,  March,  1885,  p.  65. 

The  microscope  in  geology :  Science,  vol.  v,  March,  1885. 

Hornblende  aus  Saint  Lawrence  county,  New  York;  Amphibol-antho- 
phyllit  aus  der  gegend  von  Baltimore ;  Ueber  das  Vorkommen  des  von 
Cohen  als  "  Hudsonit  "  bezeichneten  Gesteins  am  Hudson  Fluss :  Neues 
Jahrbuchfwr  Min.,  etc.,  vol.  ii,  1885,  p.  175. 

Cause  of  the  apparently  perfect  cleavage  in  American  sphene :  Am.  Jour. 
Sci.,  vol.  xxix,  June,  1885,  pp.  486-490. 

A  summary  of  the  progress  in  mineralogy  and  petrography  in  1885 :  Re- 
printed from  the  Am.  Naturalist  for  1885. 

The  peridotites  of  the  "  Cortlandt  series,"  near  Peekskill,  on  the  Hudson 
river,  New  York :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxi,  January,  1886,  pp.  26-41. 

The  gabbros  and  associated  hornblende  rocks  occurring  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  Baltimore,  Maryland :  Bull.  No.  28,  U.  S.  Qeol.  Survey,  Wash- 
ington, 1886,  78  pp.  and  4  colored  plates. 

Modern  petrography:  Heath's  Monographs  on  Education,  no.  1,  Boston, 
1886, 35  pp. 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


On  a  remarkable  crystal  of  pyrite  from  Baltimore  county,  Maryland :  Johns 

Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  53,  November,  1886,  p.  30. 
The  norites  of  the  "  Cortlandt  series,"  on  the  Hudson  river,  near  Peekskill, 

New  York :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxiii,  3d  ser.,  February  and  March, 

1887,  pp.  135-144  and  191-199. 

On  the  chemical  composition  of  the  orthoclase  in  the  Cortlandt  norite : 
Ibid.,  p.  243. 

On  the  serpentine  of  Syracuse,  New  York :  Science,  vol.  ix,  March  11, 1887, 
p.  232. 

On  the  serpentine  (peridotite)  occurring  in  the  Onondaga  salt-group  at 
Syracuse,  New  York:  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxiv,  August,  1887,  pp. 
137-145. 

Holocrystalline  granite  structure  in  eruptive  rocks  of  Tertiary  age. 
(Eeview  of  Stelzner's  "Beitrfige  zur  Geologie  der  Argentinischen 
Republik  ") :  Ibid.,  vol.  xxxiii,  April,  1887,  p.  315. 

Notes  on  the  minerals  occurring  in  the  neighborhood  of  Baltimore :  Balti- 
more, 1887, 18  pp. 

Note  on  some  remarkable  crystals  of  pyroxene  from  Orange  county,  New 
York :  Am.  Jour.  Set.,  vol.  xxxiv,  October,  1887,  p.  275. 

Rutil  nach  Ilmenit  in  ver&ndertem  Diabas.  Pleonast  (Hercynit)  in  Norit 
vom  Hudson-Fluss.  Perowskit  in  Serpentin  (Peridotit)  von  Syracuse, 
New  York :  Neues  Jahrbuch  fur  Min.,  etc.,  vol.  ii,  1887,  pp.  263-267. 

On  a  new  petrographical  microscope  of  American  manufacture:  Johns 
Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  62,  January,  1888,  p.  22 ;  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxv, 
February,  1888,  p.  114. 

On  a  plan  proposed  for  future  work  upon  the  geological  map  of  the  Balti- 
more region :  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  59,  August,  1887,  p.  122. 

Progress  of  the  work  on  the  Archean  geology  of  Maryland :  Ibid.,  65,  April, 

1888,  p.  61. 

The  gabbros  and  diorites  of  the  "  Cortlandt  series,"  on  the  Hudson  river, 
near  Peekskill,  New  York :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxv,  June,  1888,  pp. 
438-448. 

The  contact-metamorphism  produced  in  the  adjoining  mica-schists  and 
limestones  by  the  massive  rocks  of  the  "  Cortlandt  series,"  near  Peeks- 
kill,  New  York :  Ibid.,  vol.  xxxvi,  October,  1888,  pp.  254-269,  plate  vi. 

Geology  of  Fernando  de  Noronha.  Part  IT.  Petrography:  Ibid.,  vol. 
xxxvii,  March,  1889,  pp.  178-189. 

On  the  possibility  of  hemihedrism  in  the  monoclinic  crystal  system,  with 
especial  reference  to  the  hemihedrism  of  pyroxene :  Ibid.,  vol.  ixxviii, 
August,  1889,  pp.  115-120. 

Contributions  to  the  mineralogy  of  Maryland :  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ., 
75,  September,  1889,  p.  98. 

Some  modern  aspects  of  geology:  Popular  Science  Monthly,  September, 
1889. 

Note  on  the  eruptive  origin  of  the  Syracuse  serpentine :  Bull.  Oeol.  Soc. 
Am.,  vol.  1,  p.  533. 

Geological  and  petrographical  observations  in  southern  and  western  Nor- 
way: Ibid.,  pp.  651-653. 


Bibliography 


Celestite  from  Mineral  county,  West  Virginia :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xxxix, 
March,  1890,  pp.  183-188. 

Same,  reprinted  in  German  in  ZeitscTir.  Kryst.  u.  Min.,  vol.  xviii,  1890,  p.  1. 

On  the  hornblende  of  Saint  Lawrence  county,  New  York,  and  its  gliding 
planes :  Am.  Jour.  /Sci.,  vol.  xxxix,  May,  1890,  pp.  352-358. 

The  non-feldspathic  intrusive  rocks  of  Maryland  and  the  course  of  their 
alteration.  First  paper:  The  original  rocks:  Am.  Geologist,  vol.  vi, 
July,  1890,  p.  35. 

Elements  of  crystallography  for  students  of  chemistry,  physics  and  min- 
eralogy :  New  York,  H.  Holt  &  Co.,  8vo,  250  pp.,  383  figures  and  2  plates. 

The  greenstone-schist  areas  of  the  Menominee  and  Marquette  regions  in 
Michigan :  Bull.  No.  62,  U.  8.  Geol.  Survey,  Washington,  1890, 241  pp.,  29 
figures  and  16  plates. 

The  silicified  glass-breccia  of  Vermillion  river,  Sudbury  district:   Bull. 

Qeol.  Soc.  Am.,  vol.  2,  p.  138. 
The  petrography  and  structure  of  the  Piedmont  plateau  in  Maryland: 

IUd.,  pp.  301-318. 

Sixty-eight  reviews  of  American  geological  and  petrographical  literature, 
published  in  the  Neues  JahrbuchfurMineralogie,  Geologieu.  Palceontol- 
ogie,  between  1884  and  1890. 

Anglesite,  cerussite  and  sulphur  from  the  Mountain  View  lead  mine,  near 
Union  Bridge,  Carroll  county,  Maryland :  John*  Hopkins  Univ.Circ.,81, 
April,  1891.  [Octavo  reprint.] 

Anatase  from  the  Arvon  slate  quarries,  Buckingham  county,  Virginia :  Am. 
Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xlii,  November,  1891,  p.  431. 

Notes  on  the  microscopical  character  of  rocks  from  the  Sudbury  mining 
district,  Canada.  Appendix  I  to  Dr.  R.  Bell's  paper  on  the  Sudbury 
district,  Rep.  Geol.  and  Nat.  Hist.  Survey  of  Canada,  1888-'90,  F,  pp. 
55-82. 

Notes  on  some  eruptive  rocks  from  Alaska.  Appendix  to  H.  F.  Reid's 
paper  on  the  Muir  glacier:  Nat.  Geog.  Mag.,  vol.  iv,  pp.  63-74. 

Geological  excursion  by  university  students  across  the  Appalachians  in 
May,  1891 :  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  94,  December,  1891. 

A  university  and  its  natural  environment:  Address  before  the  Johns 
Hopkins  University :  IUd.,  96,  March,  1892. 

Crystals  of  metallic  cadmium :  Am.  Chem.  Jour.,  vol.  xiv,  p.  274. 

Geology  of  Baltimore  and  vicinity.  Part  I.  Crystalline  rocks :  Guidebook 
far  Am.  Inst.  Min.  Engineers,  Baltimore,  February,  1892,  pp.  77-124. 

Geological  map  of  Baltimore  and  vicinity :  Published  by  the  Johns  Hop- 
kins University,  G.  H.  Williams,  editor,  October,  1892. 

The  volcanic  rocks  of  South  mountain  in  Pennsylvania  and  Maryland :  Am. 
Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xliv,  December,  1892,  pp.  482-496.  [Reprinted  in  Scientific 
American,  January  14, 1893,  an  abstract  in  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ., 
103.] 

The  microscope  and  the  study  of  the  crystalline  schists :  Science,  January 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


A  new  machine  for  cutting  and  grinding  thin  sections  of  rocks  and 
minerals:  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xlv,  February,  1893,  p.  102,  and  Johns 
Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  103. 

Maps  of  the  territory  included  within  the  state  of  Maryland,  especially 
the  vicinity  of  Baltimore :  Johns  HopkinsUniv.  Circ.,  103,  February,  1893 

On  the  use  of  the  terms  poikilitic  and  micropoikilitic  in  petrography 
Jour,  of  Geology,  vol.  i,  no.  2,  February,  1893.  p.  176. 

Piedmontite  and  scheelite  from  ancient  rhyolite,  South  mountain,  Penn- 
sylvania :  Am.  Jour.  Sci.,  vol.  xlvi,  July,  1893,  p.  50. 

Crystalline  rocks  from  the  Andes :  Jour,  of  Otology,  vol.  i,  no.  4,  1893,  4, 
1893,  p.  411. 

Geology  and  mineral  resources  of  Maryland,  with  geological  map:  In  the 
book  "  Maryland,"1  published  by  the  State  Board  of  Managers  for  the 
World's  Fair  Commission,  July,  1893.  (G.  H.  Williams  and  W.  B.  Clark.) 

Geology  and  physical  features  of  Maryland :  Johns  Hopkins  press,  1893. 
(G.  H.  Williams  and  W.  B.  Clark.) 

On  the  crystal  form  of  metallic  zinc :  Am.  Chem.  Jour.,  vol.  xi,  No.  4. 
(G.  H.  Williams  and  W.  M.  Burton.) 

Distribution  of  ancient  volcanic  rocks  along  the  eastern  border  of  North 
America :  Jour,  of  Geology,  vol.  ii,  no.  1, 1894,  pp.  1-31. 

Mineral  and  petrographical  exhibits  at  Chicago :  Am.  Geologist,  vol.  xiii 
May,  1894,  pp.  345-352. 

Johann  David  Schoepf  and  his  contributions  to  North  American  geology : 
Bull.  Geol.  Soc.  Am.,  vol.  5, 1893,  pp.  591-593. 

On  the  natural  occurrence  of  Lapis  lazuli :  Johns  Hopkins  Univ.  Circ.,  114, 
July,  1894,  pp.  Ill,  112. 

Introduction  to  "  The  Granites  of  Maryland,"  by  Charles  B.  Keyes :  Fif- 
teenth Ann.  Rep.  U.  S.  Geol.  Survey,  1895,  pp.  657-684. 

Washington,  Frederick,  Patapsco  and  Gunpowder  atlas  sheets  of  the 
United  States :  U.  S.  Geol.  Survey.  (G.  H.  Williams  and  others.) 


PEEFACE 

WHEN  the  President  of  the  Johns  Hopkins  University 
invited  me  to  inaugurate  the  Lectureship  founded  in  that 
seminary  by  Mrs.  George  Huntington  Williams  in  memory 
of  her  husband,  the  distinguished  and  widely-regretted 
Professor  of  Geology  there,  I  gladly  availed  myself  of 
the  opportunity  thus  afforded  me  of  renewing  personal 
relationships  with  the  geologists  of  the  United  States,  and 
of  thus  helping  to  draw  closer  the  bonds  of  sympathy 
which  unite  the  students  of  nature  in  the  Old  World  and 
in  the  New. 

In  making  choice  of  a  subject  that  would  be  appro- 
priate for  the  required  course  of  lectures,  I  was  influenced 
by  the  announcement  that  geologists  from  all  parts  of  the 
States  and  from  Canada  would  be  asked  to  meet  me  in 
Baltimore.  As  my  audience  might  thus  include  repre- 
sentatives of  every  department  in  the  wide  domain  of 
geological  science,  it  was  obviously  desirable  not  to  select 
for  treatment  any  limited  field  in  that  domain,  but  rather 
to  choose  some  topic  of  general  interest  in  which  students 
of  every  part  of  the  science  might  meet  as  on  common 


vi  The  Founders  of  Geology 

ground.  I  had  often  been  struck  by  the  limited  acquaint- 
ance with  the  historical  development  of  geology  possessed 
even  by  men  who  have  done  good  service  in  enlarging 
the  boundaries  of  the  science.  English  and  American 
geologists  have  for  the  most  part  contented  themselves 
with  the  excellent,  but  necessarily  brief  summary  of  the 
subject  given  by  Lyell  in  the  introductory  chapters  of  his 
classic  Principles,  no  fuller  digest  of  geological  history 
having  been  published  in  their  language.  It  seemed  to 
me,  therefore,  that  perhaps  no  more  generally  interesting 
and  appropriate  theme  for  my  purpose  could  be  selected 
than  the  story  of  the  evolution  of  geology.  The  neces- 
sarily restricted  number  of  lectures  to  be  given  would 
not  admit  of  a  discursive  survey  of  the  whole  history, 
but  a  useful  end  might  doubtless  be  served  if  a  limited 
period  of  geological  progress  were  selected  and  treated 
in  rather  greater  detail  than  had  hitherto  been  usual, 
and  with  especial  reference  to  the  personal  achieve- 
ments of  the  leaders  to  whose  labours  the  progress  had 
mainly  been  due.  Accordingly  I  determined  to  take  this 
subject  for  my  discourses,  and  to  select  the  period  between 
the  middle  of  the  last  and  the  close  of  the  second  decade 
of  the  present  century — an  interval  of  about  seventy  years, 
full  of  peculiar  interest  in  the  development  of  science,  for 
they  witnessed  the  laying  of  the  foundations  of  geology. 

But  even  of  this  limited  section  of  the  history  it  was 
obviously  impossible  to  attempt  an  exhaustive  discussion. 
Without  for  a  moment  aiming  to  cover  all  the  ground,  I 


Preface  vii 

deemed  that  a  useful  task  might  still  be  undertaken  if 
the  story  of  a  few  of  the  great  pioneers  were  briefly 
narrated,  and  if  from  their  struggles,  their  failures  and 
their  successes,  it  could  be  indicated  how  geological  ideas 
and  theories  gradually  took  shape.  Such  was  the  origin 
and  aim  of  the  following  lectures. 

The  personal  intercourse  to  which,  after  an  absence 
of  eighteen  years,  I  looked  forward  with  vivid  interest 
proved  to  be  a  source  of  the  keenest  enjoyment.  Eenew- 
ing  old  friendships  with  some  of  the  veterans  of  the 
science,  and  forming  fresh  ties  of  sympathy  with  many 
younger  workers  who  have  come  to  the  front  in  more 
recent  years,  I  could  not  but  be  impressed  by  the  extra- 
ordinary vitality  which  geology  has  now  attained  in  the 
United  States.  Every  department  of  the  science  has  its 
enthusiastic  votaries.  Surveys,  professorships,  museums, 
societies,  journals  in  almost  every  State  are  the  outward 
embodiment  of  the  geological  zeal  that  appears  to  animate 
the  whole  community.  This  remarkably  rapid  develop- 
ment of  the  science  has  not  arisen  from  any  influence 
derived  from  without,  but  springs,  as  it  seems  to  me,  from 
the  marvellous  geological  riches  of  the  American  continent 
itself.  In  minerals  and  rocks,  in  stratigraphical  fulness, 
in  palseontological  profusion,  in  physiographical  illustra- 
tions, the  United  States  have  not  only  no  need  to  borrow 
from  Europe,  but  in  many  important  respects  can  produce 
examples  and  materials  such  as  cannot  be  equalled  on 
this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  Had  the  study  of  the  earth 


viii  The  Founders  of  Geology 

begun  in  the  New  World  instead  of  the  Old,  geology  would 
unquestionably  have  made  a  more  rapid  advance  than 
it  has  done.  The  future  progress  of  the  science  may  be 
expected  to  be  largely  directed  and  quickened  by  dis- 
coveries made  in  America,  and  by  deductions  from  the 
clear  evidence  presented  on  that  continent. 

Amidst  an  almost  feverish  earnestness  in  the  prosecu- 
tion of  investigation  there  is  unavoidably  a  risk  that  the 
present  activities  of  the  science,  with  their  engrossing 
interest,  may  lead  to  neglect  of  its  past  history,  and  that 
in  this  way  unintentional  injustice  may  be  done  to  the 
labours  of  the  earlier  workers,  while  at  the  same  time  the 
vision  of  living  students  may  be  narrowed  by  the  too 
exclusive  contemplation  of  what  they  and  their  comrades 
are  engaged  upon.  In  inaugurating  the  Williams  Lecture- 
ship at  Baltimore  I  hoped  that  by  turning  aside  to  the 
achievements  of  half-forgotten  pioneers,  I  might  in  some 
small  measure  help  to  counteract  this  tendency  by 
recalling  attention  to  examples  of  strenuous  and  suc- 
cessful labour  among  the  Founders  of  Geology. 


GEOLOGICAL  SURVEY  OFFICE, 
28  JERMYN  STREET,  LONDON, 
ISth  June  1897. 


CONTENTS 

LECTURE    I 

PAGE 

The  Cosmogonists  —  First  beginnings  of  accurate  and  detailed 
observation  regarding  the  Earth's  crust  and  its  history — 
Guettard  and  his  labours  .  .  .  .  .1 

LECTUEE    II 

The  rise  of  volcanic  geology — Desmarest — Rise  of  geological  travel 

— Pallas,  De  Saussure     .  .  .  .  .  .47 

LECTUEE    III 

History  of  the  doctrine  of  Geological  Succession — Lehmann,  Fuchsel, 
Werner — The  spread  and  decline  of  Wernerianism — D'Aubuis- 
son,  Von  Buch  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  94 

LECTUEE    IV 

Rise  of  the  modern  conception  of  the  theory  of  the  earth — Hutton, 

Playfair — Birth  of  experimental  geology — Sir  James  Hall        .     150 

LECTUEE    V 

The  rise  of  stratigraphical  geology — The  work  of  Giraud-Soulavie, 
Cuvier,  Brongniart  and  Omalius  d'Halloy  in  France  ;  the 
labours  of  Michell  and  William  Smith  in  England  .  .  201 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


LECTUKE   VI 

PAGE 

The  Transition  or  Greywacke  formation  resolved  by  Sedgwick  and 
Murchison  into  the  Cambrian,  Silurian  and  Devonian  systems 
— The  pre-Cambrian  rocks  first  begun  to  be  set  in  order  by 
Logan  —  Foundation  of  Glacial  Geology,  Agassiz  —  Rise  of 
modern  Petrography ;  William  Nicol,  Henry  Clifton  Sorby — 
The  influence  of  Lyell  and  Darwin — Conclusion  .  .  .  242 


LECTUKE  I 

The  Cosmogonists — First  beginnings  of  accurate  and  detailed  ob- 
servation regarding  the  Earth's  crust  and  its  history — Guettard 
and  his  labours. 

IN  science,  as  in  all  other  departments  of  human  know- 
ledge and  inquiry,  no  thorough  grasp  of  a  subject  can  be 
gained,  unless  the  history  of  its  development  is  clearly 
appreciated.  While  eagerly  pressing  forward  in  the  search 
after  the  secrets  of  Nature,  we  are  apt  to  keep  the  eye  too 
constantly  fixed  on  the  way  that  has  to  be  travelled,  and 
to  lose  sight  and  remembrance  of  the  paths  already  trodden. 
Yet  it  is  eminently  useful  now  and  then  to  pause  in  the 
race,  and  to  look  backward  over  the  ground  that  has  been 
traversed,  to  mark  the  errors  as  well  as  the  successes  of 
the  journey,  to  note  the  hindrances  and  the  helps  which 
we  and  our  predecessors  have  encountered,  and  to  realize 
what  have  been  the  influences  that  have  more  especially 
tended  to  retard  or  quicken  the  progress  of  research. 

Such  a  review  is  an  eminently  human  and  instructive 
exercise.  Bringing  the  lives  and  deeds  of  our  forerunners 
vividly  before  us,  it  imparts  even  to  the  most  abstruse 
and  technical  subjects  much  of  the  personal  charm  which 

B 


2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

contact  with  strenuous,  patient,  and  noble  natures  never 
fails  to  reveal.  Moreover,  it  has  a  double  value  in  its 
bearing  on  our  own  progress  in  scientific  work.  A  retro- 
spect of  this  kind  leads  to  a  clearer  realization  of  the 
precise  position  at  which  we  have  arrived,  and  a  wider 
conception  of  the  extent  and  limits  of  the  domain  of 
knowledge  which  has  been  acquired.  On  the  other  hand, 
by  enabling  us  to  comprehend  how,  foot  by  foot,  the 
realms  of  science  have  been  painfully  conquered,  it 
furnishes  suggestive  lessons  as  to  tracks  that  should  be 
avoided,  and  fields  that  may  be  hopefully  entered. 

In  no  department  of  natural  knowledge  is  the  adoption 
of  this  historical  method  more  necessary  and  useful  than  it 
is  in  Geology.  The  subjects  with  which  that  branch  of 
science  deals  are,  for  the  most  part,  not  susceptible  of 
mathematical  treatment.  The  conclusions  formed  in 
regard  to  them,  being  often  necessarily  incapable  of  rigid 
demonstration,  must  rest  on  a  balance  of  probabilities. 
There  is  thus  room  for  some  difference  of  opinion  both 
as  to  facts  and  the  interpretation  of  them.  Deductions 
and  inferences  which  are  generally  accepted  in  one  age 
may  be  rejected  in  the  next.  This  element  of  uncertainty 
has  tended  to  encourage  speculation.  Moreover,  the 
subjects  of  investigation  are  themselves  often  calculated 
powerfully  to  excite  the  imagination.  The  story  of  this 
earth  since  it  became  a  habitable  globe,  the  evolution  of 
its  continents,  the  birth  and  degradation  of  its  mountains, 
the  marvellous  procession  of  plants  and  animals  which, 
since  the  beginning  of  time,  has  passed  over  its  surface, — 
these  and  a  thousand  cognate  themes  with  which  geology 
deals,  have  attracted  numbers  of  readers  and  workers  to  its 


Early  History  of  the  Science 


pale,  have  kindled  much  general  interest,  and  awakened 
not  a  little  enthusiasm.  But  the  records  from  which  the 
chronicle  must  be  compiled  are  sadly  deficient  and  frag- 
mentary. The  deductions  which  these  records  suggest 
ought  frequently  to  be  held  in  suspense  from  want  of 
evidence.  Yet  with  a  certain  class  of  minds  fancy  comes 
in  to  supply  the  place  of  facts  that  fail.  And  thus 
geology  has  been  encumbered  with  many  hypotheses  and 
theories  which,  plausible  as  they  might  seem  at  the  time 
of  their  promulgation,  have  one  by  one  been  dissipated 
before  the  advance  of  fuller  and  more  accurate  knowledge. 
Yet  before  their  overthrow,  it  may  often  be  hard  to  separate 
the  actual  ascertained  core  of  fact  within  them,  from  the 
mass  of  erroneous  interpretation  and  unfounded  inference 
that  forms  most  of  their  substance. 

From  the  beginning  of  its  growth,  geology  has  un- 
doubtedly suffered  from  this  tendency  to  speculation 
beyond  the  sober  limits  of  experience.  Its  cultivators 
have  been  often  described  as  mere  theorists.  And  yet  in 
spite  of  these  defects,  the  science  has  made  gigantic  strides 
during  the  last  hundred  years,  and  has  gradually  accumu- 
lated a  body  of  well-ascertained  knowledge  regarding  the 
structure  and  history  of  the  earth.  No  more  interesting 
record  of  human  endeavour  and  achievement  can  be  found 
than  that  presented  by  the  advance  of  geology.  A  hundred 
years  ago  the  science  had  no  generally  acknowledged  name 
and  place  in  the  circle  of  human  studies,  and  now  it  can 
boast  a  voluminous  ^Literature,  hundreds  of  associations 
all  over  the  world  dedicated  to  its  cultivation,  and  a 
state  organization  in  almost  every  civilized  country  for 
its  systematic  prosecution.  I  propose  to  ask  you  to  trace 


4  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

with  me  some  of  the  leading  steps  in  this  magnificent 
progress.  Even  speculations  that  have  been  thrown  aside, 
and  theories  that  have  heen  long  forgotten,  may  be  found 
to  have  been  not  without  their  use  in  promoting  the  general 
advance. 

If  all  history  is  only  an  amplification  of  biography,  the 
history  of  science  may  be  most  instructively  read  in  the 
life  and  work  of  the  men  by  whom  the  realms  of  Nature 
have  been  successively  won.  I  shall  therefore  dwell 
much  on  the  individual  achievements  of  a  few  great 
leaders  in  the  onward  march  of  geology,  and  indicate  how 
each  of  them  has  influenced  the  development  of  the 
science.  At  the  same  time,  I  shall  trace  the  rise  and  pro- 
gress of  some  of  the  leading  principles  of  modern  geology, 
which,  though  now  familiar  to  us  all  as  household  words, 
are  seldom  studied  in  regard  to  their  historical  develop- 
ment. Thus,  partly  in  the  life-work  of  the  men,  and  partly 
in  the  growth  of  the  ideas  which  they  promulgated,  we 
shall  be  able  to  realize  by  what  successive  steps  our  science 
has  been  elaborated. 

The  subject  which  I  have  chosen,  if  treated  as  fully  as 
it  might  fitly  be,  would  require  a  long  course  of  lectures. 
Within  the  limits  permissible  to  me,  I  can  only  attempt 
to  present  an  outline  of  it.  Instead  of  trying  to  summarize 
the  whole  progress  of  modern  geology,  I  think  it  will  be 
more  interesting  and  profitable  to  dwell  somewhat  fully 
on  the  labours  of  a  few  of  the  early  masters,  to  touch 
only  lightly  on  those  of  their  less  illustrious  contemporaries, 
and  to  do  little  more  than  allude  to  the  modern  magnates 
whose  life  and  work  are  generally  familiar.  I  have  ac- 
cordingly selected  for  more  special  treatment  the  period 


Early  History  of  the  Science 


which  extends  from  the  middle  of  last  century  to  the 
earlier  decades  of  this,  or  a  period  of  about  seventy  years. 
A  few  later  conspicuous  names  will  require  some  brief 
notice  in  order  to  fill  up  the  general  outlines  of  our  picture. 

Every  geologist  is  familiar  with  the  account  of  geological 
progress  sketched  by  Lyell  in  the  first  four  chapters  of 
his  Principles.  I  need  not  therefore  offer  even  the  briefest 
summary  of  what  preceded  the  period  which  is  now  to  be 
illustrated  in  fuller  detail.  Let  me  merely  recall  to  your 
memory  the  early  work  of  the  Italian  observers  who,  with 
the  evidence  before  their  eyes  of  active  and  extinct  vol- 
canoes, of  upraised  shell -beds  and  abundant  traces  of 
former  terrestrial  vicissitudes,  took  broad  views  of  the 
history  of  the  earth,  and  arrived  at  conclusions  which  have 
been  sustained  and  amplified  by  later  generations.  The 
labours  of  Steno,  Vallisneri,  Moro,  and  Generelli  furnished 
a  body  of  fact  amply  sufficient  to  disprove  the  current 
fantastic  theories  of  the  earth  and  to  lay  some  of  the 
foundation-stones  of  modern  geology.  Woodward,  Lister, 
Hooke  and  Eay  may  be  quoted  as  notable  writers  in 
England  by  whom,  in  spite  of  their  imperfect  knowledge 
and  frequent  mistakes,  the  rise  of  geology  was  heralded. 
Hooke  is  especially  deserving  of  an  honoured  place  among 
the  early  pioneers  of  the  future  science.  - 

The  true  scientific  spirit  of  observation  and  experiment 
had  long  been  abroad  and  at  work  in  many  branches  of 
inquiry  before  it  became  dominant  in  the  geological  field. 
The  necessity  for  a  close  scrutiny  of  nature  as  the  basis  of 
sound  deduction  had  for  generations  been  recognized  by 
some  of  the  more  thoughtful  minds  before  it  was  developed 
into  a  system  by  Bacon.  Even  as  far  back  as  the  latter 


6  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

half  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  method  of  practical 
research,  as  opposed  to  mere  book-knowledge  and  theory, 
had  been  advocated  even  for  the  investigation  of  the  rocky 
part  of  the  earth.  It  was  proclaimed,  in  no  uncertain 
voice,  by  the  learned  and  versatile  Dane,  Peter  Severinus, 
who  counselled  his  readers  thus :  "  Go,  my  sons,  sell  your 
lands,  your  houses,  your  garments  and  your  jewelry ;  burn 
up  your  books.  On  the  other  hand,  buy  yourselves  stout 
shoes,  get  away  to  the  mountains,  search  the  valleys,  the 
deserts,  the  shores  of  the  sea,  and  the  deepest  recesses  of 
the  earth  ;  mark  well  the  distinctions  between  animals, 
the  differences  among  plants,  the  various  kinds  of  minerals, 
the  properties  and  mode  of  origin  of  everything  that  exists. 
Be  not  ashamed  to  learn  by  heart  the  astronomy  and 
terrestrial  philosophy  of  the  peasantry.  Lastly,  purchase 
coals,  build  furnaces,  watch  and  experiment  without  weary- 
ing. In  this  way,  and  no  other,  will  you  arrive  at  a 
knowledge  of  things  and  of  their  properties." x  The  modern 
spirit  of  investigation  in  natural  science  could  not  be  more 
clearly  or  cogently  enforced  than  it  was  by  this  professor 
of  literature  and  poetry,  of  meteorology  and  of  medicine,  in 
the  year  1571. 

In  spite  of  such  teaching,  it  was  long  before  what  is 
now  regarded  as  the  domain  of  geology  was  definitely 
recognized  as  one  that  was  not  to  be  surrendered  to  mere 
fanciful  speculation,  but  which  offered  an  unsurpassed 
wealth  of  material  for  the  most  sedulous  observation  and 
the  most  scrupulous  induction.  The  chief  obstructors  of 
progress  in  this  department  of  human  inquiry  were  the 

1  Petras  Severinus,  Idea  Medetinae  Philosophicae,  1571,  p.  73,  cap.  vii. 
•  De  principiis  corporum  (cited  by  D'Aubuisson). 


The  Cosmogonists — Leibnitz 


cosmogonists  who,  often  with  the  slenderest  equipment  of 
knowledge  of  nature,  endeavoured  to  account  for  the  origin 
of  things.  They  were  not  disconcerted  by  phenomena  that 
contradicted  their  theories,  for  they  usually  never  saw  such 
phenomena,  and  when  they  did,  they  easily  explained 
them  away. 

Many  of  these  writers  were  divines,  yet  even  when  they 
were  laymen  they  felt  themselves  bound  to  suit  their 
speculations  to  the  received  interpretation  of  the  books  of 
Moses.  Looking  back  from  our  present  vantage  ground,  it 
is  difficult  to  realize  that  even  the  little  which  had  been 
ascertained  about  the  structure  of  the  earth  was  not 
sufficient  to  prevent  some,  at  least,  of  the  monstrous 
doctrines  of  these  theorists  from  being  promulgated.  It 
was  a  long  time  before  men  came  to  understand  that  any 
true  theory  of  the  earth  must  rest  upon  evidence  furnished 
by  the  globe  itself,  and  that  no  such  theory  could  properly 
be  framed  until  a  large  body  of  evidence  had  been  gathered 
together. 

By  a  curious  coincidence,  the  writings  of  the  two  last  and 
most  illustrious  of  the  cosmogonists  appeared  during  the 
middle  of  last  century  in  the  same  year.  Leibnitz  (born  in 
1646),  fascinated  by  the  problems  connected  with  the  history 
of  the  earth,  had  forniulated  his  prescient  views  on  this 
subject  in  his  Protogaea>  but  this  work  was  not  fully  pub- 
lished until  long  after  the  death  of  its  author.  Adopting 
the  idea  of  Descartes,  he  believed  that  at  first  our  planet 
was  a  regularly  shaped  globe  of  molten  liquid  which  gradu- 
ally cooled  and  solidified,  and  in  so  doing  assumed  irregu- 
larities of  surface  which  formed  mountain  chains.  The 
first  crust  solidified  as  the  most  ancient  or  "  primary  "  rocks, 


8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

and  as  the  cooling  continued,  the  vapours  condensed  into 
a  universal  ocean  of  water.  The  interior  of  the  planet 
possessed  a  vaulted  or  vesicular  structure,  and  the  roofs  of 
the  vast  caverns,  from  time  to  time  giving  way,  produced 
dislocations  and  inundations,  while  large  bodies  of  water 
were  drawn  off  into  the  interior,  and  the  dry  land  pro- 
gressively increased  in  area  and  height.  By  the  commotion 
of  the  waters  large  quantities  of  sediment  were  produced, 
which,  during  the  intervals  between  the  disturbances,  were 
deposited  over  the  sea-floor  to  form  the  various  strata  that 
are  to  be  seen  on  the  land.  By  a  repetition  of  the  same 
sequence  of  events,  the  strata  were  broken  up,  and  new 
deposits  were  laid  down  upon  them,  until,  as  the  agencies 
became  quiescent  and  balanced,  a  "  consistentior  rerum 
status  "  emerged. 

The  other  cosmogonist,  Buffon,  born  in  1707,  had  like- 
wise conceived  broad  and  profound  ideas  regarding  the 
whole  realm  of  Nature.  Endowed  with  a  spirit  of  bold 
generalization,  and  gifted  with  a  style  of  singular  clearness 
and  eloquence,  he  was  peculiarly  fitted  to  fascinate  his 
countrymen,  and  to  exercise  a  powerful  influence  on  the 
scientific  progress  of  his  age.  He  is  the  central  figure  in  a 
striking  group  of  writers  and  observers  who  placed  France 
in  the  very  front  of  the  onward  march  of  science,  and  who 
laid  some  of  the  foundation-stones  of  modern  geology. 

The  introductory  portion  of  Buffon's  voluminous 
Natural  History  was  devoted  to  a  theory  of  the  earth. 
Though  written  in  1744,  it  was  not  published  until  1749. 
The  author  had  meditated  long  and  deeply  on  the  mean- 
ing of  the  fossil  shells  found  so  abundantly  among  the 
rocks  of  the  earth's  crust,  and  had  recognized  that,  as  they 


The  Cosmogonists — Buffon 


demonstrated  the  condition  of  the  globe  not  to  have  been 
always  what  it  is  now,  any  true  theory  of  the  earth  must 
trace  the  history  of  the  planet  back  to  a  time  before  the 
present  condition  was  established.  With  great  insight, 
he  saw  that  this  history  must  be  intimately  linked  with 
that  of  the  solar  system,  of  which  it  formed  a  part.  He 
thought  that  the  various  planets  were  originally  portions 
of  the  mass  of  the  sun,  from  which  they  were  detached 
by  the  shock  of  a  comet,  whereby  the  impulse  of  rotation 
and  of  revolution  in  the  same  general  plane  was  com- 
municated to  them.  In  composition,  therefore,  they  are 
similar  to  their  parent  sun,  only  differing  from  that  body  in 
temperature.  He  inferred  that  at  first  they  were  intensely 
hot  and  self-luminous,  but  gradually  became  dark  as  they 
cooled,  the  central  sun  still  remaining  in  a  state  of 
incandescence. 

Though  we  now  believe  the  hypothesis  of  a  cometary 
shock  to  be  untenable,  it  is  impossible  to  refuse  our  admira- 
tion to  the  sagacity  of  the  man  who  first  tried  to  solve  the 
problem  of  the  solar  system  by  the  application  of  the 
laws  of  mechanics.  His  theory,  however,  was  loaded  with 
several  crude  conceptions.  The  enormous  numbers  and 
wide  diffusion  of  fossil  shells,  which  had  so  vividly  im- 
pressed his  imagination,  proved  to  him  that  the  land  must 
have  lain  long  under  the  sea.  But  he  had  no  idea  of  any 
general  cause  that  leads  to  elevation  of  the  sea-bottom  into 
land.  He  was  thus  constrained  to  resort  to  his  imagination 
for  a  solution  of  the  problem.  Burnet  had  supposed  the 
original  ocean  to  be  contained  within  the  earth,  and  that  it 
only  escaped  at  the  time  of  the  Flood,  when,  by  the  heat 
of  the  sun,  the  crust  of  the  globe  had  cracked,  and  thus 


io  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

allowed  the  pent-up  waters  to  rush  out.  Buffon's  theory 
was  hardly  less  fanciful.  But  he  reversed  the  order  of 
events.  He  inferred  from  the  abundance  of  fossil  shells 
that  there  had  once  been  a  universal  ocean,  and  that  by 
the  giving  way  of  the  crust,  a  portion  of  the  waters  was 
engulfed  into  caverns  in  the  interior,  so  as  to  expose  what 
are  now  mountains  and  dry  land. 

For  some  thirty  years  after  the  publication  of  his 
Theory,  Buffon  continued  to  work  industriously  in  all 
departments  of  natural  history.  At  last,  in  1778,  he  re- 
turned to  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  earth  and  pub- 
lished his  Epochs  of  Nature.  In  this  work  he  arranged 
the  history  of  the  globe  in  six  epochs — intervals  of  time 
of  which  the  limits,  though  indeterminate,  seemed  to  him 
none  the  less  real.  The  first  epoch  embraced  the  primeval 
time  when  the  earth,  newly  torn  from  the  sun,  existed  still 
as  a  molten  mass  which,  under  the  influence  of  rotation, 
assumed  its  oblate  spheroidal  form.  The  transition  from 
fluidity  to  solidity,  and  from  luminosity  to  opacity  was 
brought  about  entirely  by  cooling,  which  commenced  at 
the  outer  surface.  A  crust  was  thus  formed,  outside  of 
which  the  substances,  such  as  air  and  water,  which  were 
not  solidified  by  the  lowering  of  temperature,  remained  as 
a  fluid  or  aeriform  envelope,  while  the  interior  still  con- 
tinued for  a  long  time  liquid. 

Buffon's  second  epoch  was  characterized  by  the  con- 
solidation of  the  molten  globe,  and  the  appearance  of 
hollows  and  ridges,  gaps  and  swellings,  over  its  surface. 
These  inequalities  in  the  crust  of  granite,  gneiss  and  other 
ancient  crystalline  rocks,  gave  rise  to  the  mountains  and 
valleys  of  the  higher  portions  of  the  land. 


i  The  Cosmogonists — Buff  on  n 

The  third  epoch  included  the  time  when  the  sea  stood 
from  9000  to  12,000  feet  higher  than  it  does  now,  as  was 
supposed  to  be  indicated  by  the  heights  at  which  marine 
organisms  are  found  in  the  rocks.  It  was  then  that  the 
calcareous  fossiliferous  formations  were  formed,  which 
constitute  so  much  of  the  present  dry  land. 

The  fourth  epoch  witnessed-  the  emergence  of  the  lower 
part  of  the  land,  owing  to  the  sinking  of  the  waters  through 
cracks  into  cavities  in  the  interior  of  the  globe.  Pro- 
foundly as  Buffon  had  meditated  on  the  structure  of  the 
earth,  he  had  thus  during  thirty  years  made  no  advance  in 
his  views  of  the  origin  of  the  dry  land. 

The  fifth  epoch  was  marked  by  the  advent  of  huge 
pachyderms — elephants,  rhinoceroses,  and  hippopotamuses, 
which,  though  now  confined  to  warm  regions,  then 
wandered  far  into  the  north. 

The  sixth  epoch  saw  the  separation  of  the  two  con- 
tinents which,  as  was  inferred  from  the  presence  in  each 
of  them  of  what  were  believed  to  be  the  same  fossil 
mammals,  were  originally  united. 

Buffon  added  a  seventh  epoch,  in  which  he  traced  the 
commanding  influence  of  man  in  modifying  the  surface  of 
tne  earth. 

Becognizing  the  powerful  agency  of  rivers  and  the  sea 
in  washing  away  the  materials  of  the  land,  he  believed 
that  by  this  action  the  whole  of  the  existing  continents 
will  finally  be  reduced  and  covered  by  the  ocean ;  and  he 
conceived  that  by  the  same  series  of  changes  new  lands 
will  ultimately  be  formed. 

For  breadth  and  grandeur  of  conception  Buffon  far  sur- 
passed the  earlier  writers  who  had  promulgated  theories 


LECT. 


1 2  The  Founders  of  Geology 

of  the  earth.  The  rare  literary  skill  with  which  he  pre- 
sented his  views  enabled  him  to  exercise  a  powerful  influ- 
ence on  his  contemporaries,  and  to  direct  their  attention 
to  the  deeply  interesting  problems  of  which  he  wrote. 
Yet  he  could  never  shake  himself  free  from  the  theological 
bias  which  had  so  long  lain  as  an  incubus  upon  the  pro- 
gress of  scientific  investigation.  The  theological  doctors 
of  the  Sorbonne  compelled  him  to  publish  a  retractation 
even  of  the  very  guarded  statements  he  had  presented  in 
his  Theory  of  the  Earth  —  statements  which  are  now 
accepted  among  the  obvious  commonplaces  of  science. 
Although  the  second  treatise  shows  that  the  long  interval 
of  thirty  years  had  given  him  greater  freedom  and  had 
still  further  enlarged  his  views  of  nature,  he  was  evidently 
unaware  of  much  that  had  been  observed  and  described 
during  that  interval  by  his  own  countrymen  and  in  other 
parts  of  Europe.  His  eloquent  pages  are  rather  a 
pictorial  vision  of  what  his  brilliant  imagination  bodied 
forth  as  the  origin  of  things,  than  a  sober  attempt  to  work 
out  a  theory  on  a  basis  of  widely  collected,  carefully  sifted 
and  systematically  co-ordinated  facts. 

Among  Buffon's  contemporaries  there  lived  a  man  of 
a  totally  different  stamp,  who,  shunning  any  approach  to 
theory,  dedicated  himself  with  the  enthusiasm  of  a  true 
naturalist  to  the  patient  observation  and  accumulation  of 
facts  regarding  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  crust,  and  to  whom 
modern  geology  owes  a  deep  debt  of  gratitude,  that  has 
never  yet  been  adequately  paid.  This  man,  Jean  I^tienne 
Guettard  (1715-1786),  was  born  in  the  year  1715  at  the  little 
town  of  Etampes,  about  thirty  miles  S. W.  from  Paris.1  As 

1  For  the  biographical  facts  here  given  I  am  indebted  to  the  £loge  of 


i  Guettards  Early  Career  1 3 

the  grandson  of  an  apothecary  there,  he  was  destined  to 
succeed  to  the  business  of  compounding  and  selling  drugs. 
Before  he  left  home  for  his  professional  education,  he  had 
already  developed  a  passion  for  natural  history  pursuits. 
When  still  a  mere  child,  he  used  to  accompany  his  grand- 
father in  his  walks,  and  his  greatest  happiness  was  found 
in  collecting  plants,  asking  their  names  and  learning  to 
recognize  them,  and  to  distinguish  their  different  parts. 
Every  nook  and  corner  around  Etampes  became  familiar 
to  him,  and  in  later  years  he  loved  to  revisit,  with  the  eye 
of  a  trained  naturalist,  the  scenes  which  had  fascinated  his 
boyhood.  In  his  writings  he  loses  no  opportunity  of 
citing  his  native  place  for  some  botanical  or  geological 
illustration.  Thus,  at  the  very  beginning  of  a  long  and 
suggestive  memoir  on  the  degradation  of  mountains,  to 
which  further  reference  will  be  made  in  the  sequel,  his 
thoughts  revert  to  the  haunts  of  his  infancy,  and  the  first 
illustration  he  cites  of  the  processes  of  decay  which  are 
discussed  in  that  paper  is  taken  from  a  picturesque  rock 
overlooking  the  valley  of  the  Juine,  under  the  shade  of 
which  he  used  to  play  with  his  companions.1 

Having  gained  the  favourable  notice  of  the  famous 
brothers  Jussieu,  who  gave  renown  to  the  botanical  depart- 
ment of  the  Jardin  des  Plantes,  he  was  allowed  by  his 
grandfather  to  choose  a  career  that  would  afford  scope  for 
his  ardour  in  science.  Accordingly  he  became  a  doctor 
in  medicine.  Eventually  he  was  attached  to  the  suite  of 
the  Duke  of  Orleans,  whom  he  accompanied  in  his  travels, 

Guettard  by  Condorcet  (Oeuvres,  edit.  1847,  vol.  iii.  p.  220)  and  to  the 
personal  references  which  I  have  met  with  in  Guettard's  writings. 

1  M&noires  sur  difffrentes  parties  des  Sciences  et  Arts,  tome  iii.  p.  210 
(1770). 


1 4  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

and  of  whose  extensive  natural  history  collections  he 
became  custodian.  On  the  Duke's  death  he  enjoyed  from 
his  son  and  successor  a  modest  pension  and  a  small  lodging 
in  the  Palais  Koyal  at  Paris. 

It  was  to  botany  that  his  earlier  years  of  unwearied 
industry  were  mainly  given.  In  the  course  of  his  botanical 
wanderings  over  France  and  other  countries  he  observed 
how  frequently  the  distribution  of  plants  is  dependent 
upon  the  occurrence  of  certain  minerals  and  rocks.  He 
was  led  to  trace  this  dependence  from  one  district  to 
another,  and  thus  became  more  and  more  interested  in 
what  was  then  termed  "mineralogy,"  until  this  subject 
engrossed  by  far  the  largest  share  of  his  thoughts  and 
labours. 

But  Guettard  was  far  more  than  a  mineralogist. 
Although  the  words  "geology"  and  "geologist"  did  not 
come  into  use  for  half  a  century  later,  his  writings  show  him 
to  have  been  a  geologist  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word. 
He  confined  himself,  however,  to  the  duty  of  assiduous 
observation,  and  shunned  the  temptation  to  speculate. 
He  studied  rocks  as  well  as  minerals,  and  traced  their 
distribution  over  the  surface  of  Europe.  He  observed 
the  action  of  the  forces  by  which  the  surface  of  the  land 
is  modified,  and  he  produced  some  memoirs  of  the  deepest 
interest  in  physiography.  His  training  in  natural  history 
enabled  him  to  recognize  and  describe  the  organisms  which 
he  found  in  the  rocks,  and  he  thus  became  one  of  the 
founders  of  palaeontological  geology.  He  produced  about 
200  papers  on  a  wide  range  of  subjects  in  science,  and 
published  some  half-dozen  quarto  volumes  of  his  observa- 
tions, together  with  many  excellent  plates. 


i  Neglect  of  Guettard  and  his  Work          1 5 

It  is  astonishing  that  this  man,  who  in  his  day  was  one 
of  the  most  distinguished  members  of  the  French  Academy 
of  Sciences,  and  who  undoubtedly  is  entitled  to  rank 
among  the  few  great  pioneers  of  modern  geology,  should 
have  fallen  into  complete  oblivion  in  English  geological 
literature.  I  shall  have  occasion  to  show  that  the  process 
of  ignoring  him  began  even  in  his  lifetime,  and  that, 
though  free  from  the  petty  vanities  of  authorship,  he  was 
compelled  in  the  end  to  defend  his  claim  to  discoveries 
that  he  had  made.  After  his  death  he  was  the  subject  of 
a  kindly  and  appreciative  doge  by  his  friend  Condorcet, 
the  perpetual  Secretary  of  the  Academy.1  His  work  was 
noticed  at  length  in  the  great  Encyclopedia  Methodique  of 
Diderot  and  D'Alembert,  published  thirteen  years  after  he 
was  laid  in  the  grave.2  Cuvier  in  his  doge  of  Desmarest 
gave  to  Guettard  the  credit  of  one  of  his  discoveries.3  But 
his  work  seems  to  have  been  in  large  measure  lost  sight 
of  until  in  1862,4  and  again  in  1866,5  the  Comte  d'Archiac 
dwelt  at  some  length  on  his  services  to  the  progress  of 
geology.  More  recently  Guettard's  labours  have  been  the 

1  (Euvres  de  Condorcet,  vol.  iii.  p.  220. 

2  Geographic  Physique  by  Desmarest,  forming  vol.  i.  of  the  Encyclopedic, 
and  published  An  III  (1794).    The  article  on  Guettard  (by  Desmarest)  gives 
a  critical  review  of  his  work,  especially  of  those  parts  of  it  which  bear  on 
physical  geography.     The  large  number  and  value  of  his  observations  on 
fossil  organisms  is  admitted.    But  his  method  of  constructing  mineral ogical 
maps  is  severely  handled,  and  his  claim  to  the  discovery  of  the  extinct 
volcanoes  of  Auvergne  is  contemptuously  rejected.      The  whole  tone  of 
the  article  is  somewhat  ungenerous.    The  imperfections  of  Guettard's  work 
are  fully  set  forth,  but  little  is  said  of  its  merits. 

3  Cuvier's  filoges  Ristoriques,  vol.  ii.  p.  354  (1819) 

4  A.  D'Archiac,   Cours  de  PaUontologie  Stratigraphique,  pp.  284-304, 
1862. 

5  A.    D'Archiac,    Gtologie    et   PaUontologie,  lre    partie,  pp.    112-118 
(1866).     The  account  of  Guettard  in  this  work  is  little  more  than  a  con- 


1 6  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

theme  of  sympathetic  comment  from  Ch.  Sainte-Claire 
Deville1  and  Aime  de  Soland.2 

In  the  geological  literature  of  the  English-speaking 
countries,  however,  we  shall  search  in  vain  for  any  adequate 
recognition  of  the  place  of  this  early  master  of  the  science. 
That  famous  classic,  Conybeare  and  Phillip's  Outlines  of 
ike  Geology  of  England  and  Wales,  contains  a  reference  to 
the  French  observer  as  the  first  man  who  constructed 
geological  maps.  Scrope3  and  Daubeny4  cite  him  for  his 
observations  in  Auvergne.  But  Lyell  in  his  well-known 
summary  of  the  progress  of  geology  does  not  even  men- 
tion his  name. 

It  is  difficult  to  account  for  this  neglect.  Possibly  it 
may  be  partly  attributable  to  the  cumbrous  and  diffuse 
style  in  which  Guettard  wrote,5  and  to  the  enormous  bulk 
of  his  writings.  When  a  man  contributes  scores  of 
voluminous  papers  to  the  transactions  of  a  learned  academy; 
when  he  publishes,  besides,  an  armful  of  bulky  and  closely 
printed  quartos,  and  when  these  literary  labours  are  put 
before  the  world  in  by  no  means  an  attractive  form,  per- 
haps a  large  share  of  the  blame  may  be  laid  to  his  own 

densation  of  the  narrative  in  the  author's  previous  Cours.  Even  after 
these  appreciative  references  Lecoq  in  his  £poques  Geologiques  de 
V Auvergne  omits  Guettard's  name  from  the  list  of  those  he  specially  cites, 
and  when  he  has  occasion  to  mention  him,  does  so  in  a  very  grudging 
spirit.  See  his  Introduction,  p.  xiii.  and  vol.  iii.  p.  155. 

1  Coup  d'ceil  historique  sur  la  Geologic,  pp.  311-314  (1878). 

2  "Etude  sur  Guettard,"  Annales  de  la  Soctete  Linneenne  de  Main-et- 
Loire,  13me,  i4me>  et  15me  annees,  pp.  32-88  (1871,  1872,  1873).     This 
appreciative  essay  contains  a  list  of  Guettard's  publications. 

3  Geology  and  Eictinct  Volcanoes  of  Central  France,  p.  30,  2nd  edition, 
1858. 

4  Description  of  Active  and  Extinct  Volcanoes,  p.  729,  2nd  edition  (1848). 

5  Of  this  defect  no  one  was  more  sensible  than  the  author  himself.    See 
his  Memoires  sur  differentes  parties  des  Sciences  et  Arts,  tome  v.  p.  421. 


i  GuettarcFs  Geographical  Geology  1 7 

door.    Guettard  may  be  said  to  have  buried  his  reputation 
under  the  weight  of  material  which  he  left  to  support  it. 

I  cannot  pretend  to  have  read  through  the  whole  of 
these  ponderous  volumes.  The  leisure  of  a  hard- worked 
official  does  not  suffice  for  such  a  task.  But  I  have 
perused  those  memoirs  which  seemed  to  me  to  give  the 
best  idea  of  Guettard's  labours,  and  of  the  value  of  his 
solid  contributions  to  science.  And  I  shall  now  proceed 
to  give  the  results  of  my  reading.  No  one  can  glance 
over  the  kindly  doge  by  Condorcet  without  a  feeling  of 
respect  and  sympathy  for  the  man  who,  under  many 
discouragements,  and  with  but  slender  means,  succeeded 
in  achieving  so  much  in  such  a  wide  circle  of  acquire- 
ment. And  there  is  thus  no  little  satisfaction  in  resus- 
citating among  American  and  English  geologists  the 
memory  of  a  man  whom  I  trust  that  they  will  recognize 
as  one  of  the  founders  of  their  science,  deserving  a  place 
not  inferior  to  that  of  some  whom  they  have  long  held 
in  honour. 

And  first  with  regard  to  Guettard's  labours  in  the 
domain  of  geographical  geology,  or  the  distribution  of 
rocks  and  minerals  over  the  surface  of  the  earth.  I  have 
referred  to  the  manner  in  which  he  was  gradually  drawn 
into  this  subject  by  his  botanical  excursions.  As  the 
result  of  his  researches,  he  communicated  in  1746  to  the 
Academy  of  Sciences  in  Paris  a  memoir  on  the  distribution 
of  minerals  and  rocks.1  Having  been  much  impressed  by 
the  almost  entire  absence  of  certain  mineral  substances 
in  some  places,  though  they  were  abundant  enough  in 
others,  he  was  led  to  suspect  that  these  substances  are 

1  M&m.  Acad.  Roy.  France,  vol.  for  1751. 
C 


1 8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

really  disposed  with  much  more  regularity  than  had  been 
previously  imagined.  He  surmised  that,  instead  of  being 
dispersed  at  random,  they  are  grouped  in  bands  which  have 
a  characteristic  assemblage  of  minerals  and  a  determinate 
trend,  so  that  when  once  the  breadth  and  direction  of  one 
of  these  bands  is  known,  it  will  be  possible,  even  where 
the  band  passes  into  an  unknown  country,  to  tell  before- 
hand which  minerals  and  rocks  should  be  found  along  its 
course. 

The  first  sentences  of  his  remarkable  Mtmoire  et  Carte 
Mineralogique  are  well  worth  quoting.  "  If  nothing,"  he 
remarks,  "can  contribute  more  towards  the  formation 
of  a  physical  and  general  theory  of  the  earth  than  the 
multiplication  of  observations  among  the  different  kinds 
of  rocks  and  the  fossils  which  they  contain,  assuredly 
nothing  can  make  us  more  sensible  of  the  utility  of  such 
a  research  than  to  bring  together  into  one  view  those 
various  observations  by  the  construction  of  mineralogical 
maps.  I  have  travelled  with  the  view  of  gaining  in- 
struction on  the  first  of  these  two  points,  and  following 
the  recommendation  of  the  Academy,  which  wished  to 
have  my  work  expressed  on  a  map,  I  have  prepared 
such  a  map,  which  contains  a  summary  of  all  my 
observations." 

The  idea  of  depicting  the  distribution  of  the  mineral 
products  of  a  country  upon  a  map  was  not  original  with 
Guettard  or  the  Academy  of  Sciences.  As  far  back  as  the 
later  years  of  the  previous  century  a  scheme  of  this  kind 
was  submitted  to  the  Royal  Society  of  London,  and 
appears  in  the  Philosophical  Transactions  with  the  quaint 
title  of  "  An  ingenious  proposal  for  a  new  sort  of  Maps  of 


i  Guettard' s  Mineralogical  Maps  1 9 

Countrys,  together  with  tables  of  sands  and  clays,  such 
chiefly  as  are  found  in  the  north  parts  of  England,  drawn 
up  about  ten  years  since,  and  delivered  to  the  Eoyal 
Society,  March  12,  1683,  by  the  Learned  Martin  Lister, 
M.D."1 

It  may  be  doubted,  however,  whether  this  proposal  of 
Lister's,  which  does  not  appear  ever  to  have  taken  any 
practical  shape,  was  known  to  Guettard,  who,  though  he 
obtained  a  large  amount  of  information  about  English 
mineral  products,  probably  derived  it  all  from  Trench 
translations  of  English  works.  He  does  not  appear  to  have 
read  English.  Guettard  inferred,  from  his  observations 
over  the  centre  and  north  of  France,  that  the  several 
bands  of  rocks  and  minerals  which  he  had  detected  were 
disposed  round  Paris  as  a  centre.  The  area  in  the  middle, 
irregularly  oval  in  shape,  comprised  the  districts  of  sand 
and  gravel,  whence  he  named  it  the  Sandy  band.  It  was 
there  that  the  sandstones,  millstones,  hard  building  stones, 
limestones,  and  gun-flints  were  met  with.  The  second  or 
Marly  band,  exactly  surrounding  the  first,  consisted  of 
little  else  than  hardened  marls,  with  occasional  shells  and 
other  fossil  bodies.  The  third  band,  called  the  "  Schitose  " 
[Schistose]  or  metalliferous,  encircled  the  second,  and  was 
distinguished  by  including  all  the  mines  of  the  different 
minerals,  as  well  as  the  pits  and  quarries  for  bitumen, 
slate,  sulphur,  marble,  granite,  fossil  wood,  coal,  etc. 

Having  convinced  himself  that  these  conclusions  could 
be  sustained  by  an  appeal  to  the  distribution  of  the 
minerals  in  the  northern  half  of  France, 'he  proceeded  to 
put  upon  a  map  the  information  he  had  collected.  Using 

1  Phil.  Trans,  vol.  xiv.  p.  739. 


2O  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

chemical  and  other  symbols,  he  placed  a  sign  at  each 
locality  where  a  particular  mineral  substance  was  known 
to  exist.  Moreover,  employing  a  variety  of  engraved 
shading,  he  showed  in  a  general  way  the  position  and 
limits  of  the  great  Paris  basin.  The  marly  band  surround- 
ing the  central  tract  of  sandy  Tertiary  strata  was  represented 
as  sweeping  inland  from  the  coast  between  Boulogne  and 
Dieppe,  through  Picardy  and  the  east  of  France  to  the 
Bourbonnais,  where,  turning  westward,  it  reached  Poitou, 
and  then  struck  northward  to  the  coast  west  of  the  mouth 
of  the  Seine.  Though  erroneously  grouping  Secondary  some- 
times with  Palaeozoic,  sometimes  with  Tertiary  strata,  and 
not  accurately  coinciding  with  the  modern  divisions  of 
the  stratigraphical  series,  the  map  yet  roughly  expresses 
the  broad  distribution  of  the  formations. 

Having  put  his  data  on  the  map  of  France,  he  came  to 
see  that  his  three  bands  were  abruptly  truncated  by  the 
English  Channel  and  Strait  of  Dover.  Carrying  out  the 
principles  he  had  established,  he  conjectured  that  these 
bands  would  be  found  to  pass  under  the  sea  and  to 
re-emerge  on  the  shores  of  England.  To  test  the  truth  of 
this  hypothesis,  he  ransacked  the  French  versions  of  two 
once  famous  English  books — Joshua  Childrey's  Britannia 
Baconica,1  and  Gerard  Boate's  Ireland's  Naturall  Historie? 

1  ' '  Britannia  Baconica,  or  the  natural  rarities  of  England,  Scotland 
and  Wales,  according  as  they  are  to  be  found  in  every  shire,  historically 
related  according  to  the  precepts  of  the  Lord  Bacon."    London,  1660. 
A  French  translation  was  published  in  1662  and  1667. 

2  "Ireland's  Naturall  Historic,  Being  a  true  and  ample  description  of 
its  situation,  greatness,  shape  and  nature ;   of  its  hills,  woods,  heaths, 
bogs  ;  of  its  fruitfull  parts  and  profitable  grounds,  with  the  severall  ways 
of  manuring  and  improving  the  same ;  with  its  heads  or  promontories, 
harbours,  roades  and  bayes ;  of  its  springs  and  fountains,  brookes,  rivers, 


i  Guettard' s  Mineralogical  Maps  2 1 

He  found  much  in  these  volumes  to  confirm  his  surmise. 
Availing  himself  of  the  information  afforded  by  them,  he 
affixed  to  the  map  of  England  the  same  system  of  symbols 
which  he  had  used  on  that  of  France,  and  roughly  indicated 
the  limits  of  his  bands  across  the  south-eastern  English 
counties.  This  portion  of  his  work,  however,  being  founded 
on  second-hand  knowledge,  is  more  vague  and  inaccurate 
than  that  which  was  based  on  his  personal  observation  in 
France. 

As  an  example  of  the  painstaking  earnestness  with 
which  Guettard  made  his  geological  notes,  it  may  be  men- 
tioned that  among  the  symbols  he  employed  on  his  map 
there  was  one  for  shells  or  marine  fossil  bodies,  and  that 
this  sign  is  plentifully  sprinkled  over  the  map.  His 
reading  enabled  him  also  to  insert  the  symbol  on  many 
parts  of  the  map  of  England  all  the  way  from  the  Wash 
to  Sussex.  On  the  map  of  France,  he  was  able  to  introduce 
an  additional  sign  denoting  that  the  shells  were  not  in 
mere  loose  deposits,  but  formed  part  of  solid  stone.  In  a 
second  map,  on  a  smaller  scale,  accompanying  the  same 
memoir,  and  embracing  the  whole  of  Western  Europe 
from  the  north  of  Iceland  to  the  Pyrenees  and  the 
Mediterranean,  Guettard  marked  by  his  system  of  notation 

loghs  ;  of  its  metalls,  minerals,  freestone,  marble,  sea-coal,  turf  and  other 
things  that  are  taken  out  of  the  ground.  And  lastly  of  the  nature  and 
temperature  of  its  air  and  season,  and  what  diseases  it  is  free  from  or 
subject  unto  ;  Conducing  to  the  advancement  of  navigation,  husbandry 
and  other  profitable  arts  and  professions.  Written  by  Gerard  Boate,  late 
Doctor  of  Physick  to  the  State  in  Ireland,  and  now  published  by  Samuel 
Hartlib,  Esq.,  for  the  common  good  of  Ireland,  and  more  especially  for 
the  benefit  of  the  Adventurers  and  Planters  there."  It  was  published  in 
London  in  1652,  and  was  dedicated  to  Oliver  Cromwell.  A  French 
version,  under  the  title  of  Histoire  Naturelle  d'lrlande,  was  published  at 
Paris  in  1666  (Diet.  Nat.  Biog.,  sub  we.  Boate). 


2  2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  localities  where  various  metals,  minerals  and  rocks 
were  known  to  exist.  In  this  way  he  brought  into  one 
view  a  large  amount  of  information  regarding  the  geogra- 
phical distribution  of  the  substances  which  he  selected  for 
illustration. 

This  memoir,  with  its  maps,  seems  to  have  gratified  the 
Academy  of  Sciences,  for  not  merely  was  it  inserted  in  the 
volume  of  Transactions  for  the  year,  but  in  the  Journal 
or  annual  summary  of  the  more  important  work  of  the 
Academy  it  occupies  a  conspicuous  place.  The  official 
record  announced  that  a  new  application  of  geography  had 
been  inaugurated  by  the  author,  who,  neglecting  the 
political  limits  traced  on  maps,  sought  to  group  the  different 
regions  of  the  earth  according  to  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
stances that  lie  beneath  the  surface.  "The  work  of  M. 
Guettard,"  it  is  further  remarked,  "  opens  up  a  new  field 
for  geographers  and  naturalists,  and  forms,  so  to  speak,  a 
link  between  two  sciences  which  have  hitherto  been 
regarded  as  entirely  independent  of  each  other." 1 

I  have  dwelt  at  some  length  on  this  early  work  of 
Guettard  because  of  its  importance  in  the  history  of 'geo- 
logical cartography.  These  maps,  so  far  as  I  know,  were  the 
first  ever  constructed  to  express  the  superficial  distribution 
of  minerals  and  rocks.  The  gifted  Frenchman  who  pro- 
duced them  is  thus  the  father  of  all  the  national  Geological 
Surveys  which  have  been  instituted  by  the  various  civilized 
nations  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Worlds.2 

1  M&m.  Acad.  Roy.  Sciences,  1751 ;  Journal,  p.  105. 

2  So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  the  earliest  geological  map 
published  with  colours  to  express  the  several  areas  of  the  rocks  was  that 
issued  at  Leipzig  in  1778  by  J.  F.  W.  Charpentier,  Professor  in  the  Mining 
Academy  of  Freiberg,  to  accompany  his  quarto  volume  on  the  Mineral- 


i  Guettard' s  Miner alogical  Maps  23 

This  early  effort  at  mineralogical  map -making  was 
merely  the  beginning  of  Guettard's  labours  in  this  depart- 
ment of  investigation.  "  If  you  will  only  let  me  have  a 
proper  map  of  France,"  he  used  to  say,  "  I  will  undertake 
to  show  on  it  the  mineral  formations  underneath."  When 
Cassini's  map  appeared,  it  enabled  him  to  put  his  design 
into  execution.  After  incredible  exertions,  during  which 
he  had  the  illustrious  chemist  Lavoisier x  as  an  assistant, 
he  completed  the  mineralogical  survey  of  no  fewer  than 
sixteen  sheets  of  the  map.  These  labours  involved 
journeys  so  frequent  and  prolonged  that  it  was  estimated 
that  he  had  travelled  over  some  1600  leagues  of  French 
soil.  At  last,  finding  the  work  beyond  his  strength,  he  left 
it  to  his  successor  Monnet,  by  whom  the  sixteen  maps  and 
a  large  folio  of  explanatory  text  were  eventually  published.2 
It  must  be  acknowledged,  however,  that  Guettard  does 
not  seem  to  have  had  any  clear  ideas  of  the  sequence  of 
formations  and  of  geological  structure ;  at  least  there  is 

ogische  Geographic  der  Chursachsischen  Lande.  Eight  tints  are  used  to 
discriminate  granite,  gneiss,  schist,  limestojie,  gypsum,  sandstone,  river- 
sand,  clay  and  loam  ;  and  there  are  also  symbols  to  point  out  the  localities 
for  basalt,  serpentine,  etc.  Palassou,  in  his  Essai  sur  la  Mintralogie  des 
Monts  Pyrtntes,  Paris,  1781,  gave  a  series  of  maps  with  engraved  lines 
and  signs,  and  also  a  route-map  of  the  part  of  France  between  Paris  and 
the  Mediterranean,  with  the  general  mineralogical  characters  of  each  line 
of  route  indicated  by  strips  of  colour.  He  thus  distinguished  by  a  green 
line  the  granite  rocks,  by  a  yellow  line  the  "schists,"  and  by  a  red  line 
the  calcareous  rocks.  He  also  indicated  the  presence  of  these  various 
formations  by  different  symbols,  among  which  was  one  for  extinct 
volcanoes,  that  figures  in  the  Clermont  region  and  also  to  the  west  of 
Montpellier.  The  early  map  of  Fuchsel  (1762)  will  be  subsequently 
referred  to. 

1  See  on  the  subject  of  Lavoisier's  co-operation,  D'Archiac's  PaUont- 
ologie  Stratigraphique,  p.  290,  and  postea,  p.  210. 

2  Atlas  et  Description  Min6ralogiques  de  la  France,  entrepris  par  ordre 
du  Roipar  MM.  Guettard  et  Monnet,  1780. 


24  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

no  sign  of  any  acquaintance  with  these  in  his  maps  or 
memoir.  His  work,  therefore,  excellent  as  it  was  for  the 
time,  contained  little  in  common  with  the  admirable 
detailed  geological  maps  of  the  present  day,  which  not  only 
depict  the  geographical  distribution  of  the  various  rocks, 
but  express  also  their  relations  to  each  other  in  point  of 
structure  and  relative  age,  and  their  connection  with  the 
existing  topography  of  the  ground. 

In  the  course  of  his  journeys,  Guettard  amassed  a  far 
larger  amount  of  detailed  information  than  could  be  put 
upon  his  maps.  From  time  to  time  he  embodied  it 
in  voluminous  essays  upon  different  regions.  The  longest 
and  most  important  of  these  is  one  in  three  parts  on  the 
mineralogy  of  the  neighbourhood  of  Paris,  in  which, 
besides  giving  an  account  of  the  distribution  of  the 
minerals  and  rocks,  he  pays  special  attention  to  the  organic 
remains  of  that  interesting  tract  of  country,  and  figures  a 
large  number  of  shells  from  what  are  now  known  as  the 
Secondary  and  Tertiary  formations. 

His  natural  history  predilections  led  him  to  take  a  keen 
interest  in  the  fossils  which  he  himself  collected,  or  which 
were  sent  up  to  Paris  from  the  country  for  his  examination. 
He  devoted  many  long  and  elaborate  memoirs  to  their 
description,  and  figured  some  hundreds  of  them.  I  may 
mention,  as  of  particular  interest  in  palseontological 
investigation,  that  Guettard  was  the  first  to  recognize 
trilobites  in  the  Silurian  slates  of  Angers.  In  some 
specimens  which  had  been  sent  up  to  the  Academy 
from  the  quarries  of  that  district,  he  observed  numerous 
impressions  of  organic  remains,  which  he  referred  to  sea- 
weeds and  Crustacea.  The  latter  he  sagaciously  compared 


i  Guettard's  Palceontology  25 

to  modern  crabs  and  prawns.  They  are  well-marked 
trilobites,  and  his  figures  of  them  are  so  excellent  that  the 
genera,  and  even  in  some  cases  the  species,  can  easily  be 
made  out.  His  representation  of  the  large  Illcenus  of 
these  Lower  Silurian  slates  is  specially  good.  His  memoir, 
read  before  the  Academy  in  1757,  and  published  in  1762,1 
is  thus  a  landmark  in  geological  literature,  for  it  appeared 
eighty  years  before  Murchison's  Silurian  System  made 
known  the  sequence  and  abundant  organic  remains  of  the 
Silurian  rocks  of  Wales. 

Guettard's  labours  in  palaeontology  ranged  over  a  wide 
field.  We  find  him  at  one  time  immersed  in  all  the  details 
of  fossil  sponges  and  corals.  At  another,  he  is  busy  with 
the  mollusca  of  the  Secondary  and  Tertiary  rocks.  Fossil 
fishes,  carnivora,  pachyderms,  cetacea — all  interest  him, 
and  find  in  him  an  enthusiastic  and  faithful  chronicler. 
His  descriptions  are  not  of  the  minutely  systematic  and 
technical  order  which  has  prevailed  since  the  time  of 
Linnaeus.  Yet  some  of  his  generic  names  have  passed 
into  the  language  of  modem  palaeontology,  and  one  of 
the  genera  of  Chalk  sponges  which  he  described  has  been 
named  after  him,  Gfuettardia.  He  had  within  him  the 
spirit  of  the  true  naturalist,  more  intent  on  understanding 
the  nature  and  affinities  of  organic  forms  than  on  adding 
new  names  to  the  scientific  vocabulary.  His  descriptions 
and  excellent  drawings  entitle  him  to  rank  as  the  first 
great  leader  of  the  palaeontological  school  of  France. 

1  "Sur  les  Ardoisieres  d' Angers,"  Trans.  Acad.  Hoy.  Sciences,  1762, 
p.  52.  The  Dudley  trilobite  of  the  Upper  Silurian  limestone  of  England 
had  been  figured  and  described  by  Lhuyd  in  his  Lithophylacii  Britannici 
Iconographia  (1699),  Epist.  i.  p.  96  and  PI.  xxii.  ;  a  figure  of  it  was  sub- 
sequently given  in  Phil.  Trans.  1754,  PI.  xi.  Fig.  2. 


26  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

As  far  back  as  the  year  1751,  when  he  was  thirty-six 
years  old,  he  presented  to  the  Academy  a  memoir  on 
certain  little-known  fossil  bodies,  in  which  he  struck,  as 
it  were,  the  keynote  of  his  future  life  in  regard  to  the 
organic  remains  enclosed  within  the  stony  records  of  former 
ages.  Like  a  man  entering  a  vast  charnel-house,  he  sees 
on  every  side  proofs  of  dead  organisms.  Others  had 
observed  these  proofs  before  him,  and  had  recognized  their 
meaning,  and  he  alludes  to  the  labours  of  his  predecessors. 
He  especially  singles  out  Palissy,  who,  though  known  chiefly 
for  eminence  as  a  potter,  was  the  first,  some  two  hundred 
years  before,  to  embrace  fossil  shells  in  his  view  of  Nature, 
to  maintain  that  those  shells  were  the  productions  of 
the  sea,  not  of  the  earth,  as  had  been  supposed,  and  to 
demonstrate  from  them  that  France  once  lay  beneath  the 
sea,  which  had  left  behind  it  such  vast  quantities  of  the 
remains  of  the  creatures  that  peopled  its  waters. 

In  Normandy,  whence  many  of  Guettard's  early  col- 
lections came,  and  where  the  people  of  the  country  looked 
upon  certain  fossil  bodies  as  forms  of  fruit — pears  and 
apples  that  had  fallen  from  the  trees  and  taken  a  solid 
form  within  the  earth — he  tells  how  half-witted  he  seemed 
to  them  when  he  expressed  a  doubt  regarding  what  they 
believed  to  be  an  obvious  truth.  He  recognized  the 
animal  nature  of  the  organisms,  and  asserted  that  the  so- 
called  peaches,  apples  and  pears  all  belonged  to  the  class 
of  corals,  though  many  of  them  are  now  known  to  be 
sponges. 

Of  all  his  numerous  and  voluminous  essays  on  palseonto- 
logical  subjects,  perhaps  that  which  most  signally  displays 
Guettard's  modern  and  philosophical  habit  of  mind  in 


i  GuettarcTs  Paleontology  27 

dealing  with  fossil  organisms  is  a  long  paper  in  three  parts, 
which  appeared  in  1765  under  the  title,  "  On  the  Accidents 
that  have  befallen  Fossil  Shells  compared  with  those  which 
are  found  to  happen  to  Shells  now  living  in  the  Sea."1 
In  spite  of  his  own  and  earlier  writings,  many  observers 
continued  to  believe  that  the  apparent  shells  found  in  the 
rocks  of  the  land  never  really  belonged  to  living  creatures, 
but  were  parts  of  the  original  structure  of  the  earth.  It 
is  incredible  how  long  this  belief  lasted,  and  what  an 
amount  of  energy  had  to  be  expended  in  killing  it.  I 
have  been  told  that  even  within  the  present  century  a 
learned  divine  of  the  University  of  Oxford  used  to  maintain 
his  opinion  that  the  fossils  in  the  rocks  had  been  purposely 
placed  there  by  the  devil  to  deceive,  mislead  and  perplex 
mankind.  In  Guettard's  days  another  opinion  of  a  contrary 
tendency  was  promulgated  by  a  Swiss  naturalist,  Bertrand, 
who  suggested  that  the  fossil  plants  and  animals  had  been 
placed  there  directly  by  the  Creator,  with  the  design  of 
displaying  thereby  the  harmony  of  His  work,  and  the 
agreement  of  the  productions  of  the  sea  with  those  of 
the  land. 

It  is  difficult,  perhaps,  to  imagine  ourselves  in  the 
position  of  naturalists  about  the  middle  of  last  century, 
to  whom  such  opinions  seemed  perfectly  logical,  natural 
and  probable.  Yet  unless  we  make  the  effort  to  realize 
the  attitude  of  men's  minds  in  those  days,  we  cannot 
rightly  appreciate  the  acumen  and  sagacity  of  the  argu- 
ments with  which  Guettard  assailed  these  opinions.  In 
much  detail,  and  with  many  admirable  illustrations  drawn 
from  his  personal  observations  all  over  France,  he_demon- 

1  Trans.  Acad.  Roy.  Sciences  (1765),  pp.  189,  329,  399. 


28  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

strated  that  fossil  shells  often  have  attached  to  them  other 
shells,  and  likewise  barnacles  and  serpulae  ;  that  many  of 
them  have  been  bored  into  by  other  organisms,  and  that 
in  innumerable  instances  they  are  found  in  a  fragmentary 
and  worn  condition.  In  all  these  respects  the  beds  of 
fossil  shells  on  the  land  are  shown  to  present  the  closest 
possible  analogy  to  the  floor  of  the  present  sea,  so  that  it 
becomes  impossible  to  doubt  that  the  accidents  which  have 
affected  the  fossil  organisms  arose  from  precisely  the  same 
causes  as  those  of  exactly  the  same  nature  that  still  befall 
their  successors  on  the  existing  ocean  bottom. 

Of  course  nowadays  such  reasoning  appears  to  us  so 
obvious  as  to  involve  no  great  credit  to  the  writer  who 
elaborated  it.  But  we  must  remember  the  state  of  natural 
knowledge  more  than  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  ago. 
As  an  example  of  the  method  of  explaining  and  illustrating 
the  former  condition  of  the  earth's  surface  by  what  can  be 
seen  to  happen  now,  Guettard's  memoir  is  unquestionably 
one  of  the  most  illustrious  in  the  literature  of  geology, 
opening  up,  as  it  did,  a  new  field  in  the  investigation  of 
the  history  of  our  globe,  and  unfolding  the  method  by 
which  this  field  had  to  be  cultivated. 

On  what  is  now  known  as  Physiographical  Geology,  or 
the  discussion  of  the  existing  topography  of  the  land,  this 
same  illustrious  Frenchman  left  the  impress  of  his  mind. 
I  will  cite  only  one  of  his  contributions  to  this  subject — 
a  memoir  "  On  the  Degradation  of  Mountains  effected  in 
our  Time  by  heavy  Kains,  Rivers  and  the  Sea."1  This 
work,  which  occupies  about  200  quarto  pages,  deals  with 

1  See  vol.  iii.  of  his  Mtmoires  sur  differentes  parties  des  Sciences  et  des 
Arts,  pp.  209-403. 


i  GuettarcTs  Physiographical  Geology         29 

the  efficacy  of  moving  water  in  altering  the  face  of  the 
land.  At  the  very  beginning  of  it,  he  starts  with  a  remin- 
iscence from  the  scenes  of  his  infancy,  and  weaves  it  into 
the  story  he  has  to  tell  of  the  ceaseless  degradation  of  the 
terrestrial  surface.  He  remembers  a  picturesque  crag  of 
the  Fontainebleau  sandstone  which,  perched  above  the 
slopes  of  a  little  valley,  had  been  worn  by  the  weather 
into  a  rudely-formed  female  figure  holding  an  infant,  and 
had  been  named  by  the  peasantry  the  Eock  of  the  Good 
Virgin.  That  crag,  under  which  he  used  to  play  with  his 
schoolmates,  had  in  the  interval  of  less  than  half  a  century 
gradually  crumbled  away,  and  had  been  washed  down  to 
the  foot  of  the  declivity.  In  the  same  neighbourhood  he 
had  noticed  at  successive  visits  that  prominent  rocks  had 
made  their  appearance  which  were  not  previously  visible. 
They  seemed,  as  it  were,  to  start  out  of  the  ground,  yet  he 
knew  that  they  arose  simply  from  the  removal  of  the 
material  that  once  covered  them.  In  like  manner  ravines 
of  some  depth  were  in  the  course  of  a  few  years  cut  out  of 
ground  where  there  had  before  been  no  trace  of  them.  In 
these  striking  examples  of  the  general  disintegration  he 
sees  only  the  continual  operation  of  "gentle  rains  and 
heavy  downpours." * 

From  illustrations  supplied  by  his  own  earliest  observa- 
tion, he  passes  on  to  others  drawn  either  from  his  personal 
researches  or  his  reading,  and  exemplifying  the  potent 
influence  of  heavy  rains  and  flooded  streams.  Not  only 
are  the  solid  rocks  mouldering  down  and  strewing  the 
slopes  below  with  their  debris,  but  the  sides  of  the  hills 
are  gashed  by  torrents,  and  narrow  defiles  are  cut  in  them, 

1  "  Des  pluies  et  des  averses,"  op.  cit.  p.  210. 


30  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

like  the  Devil's  Gap  in  Normandy.1  He  combats  the 
notion  that  landslips,  such  as  had  occurred  at  Issoire  in 
Auvergne  in  the  year  1733,  were  caused  by  internal  fires  or 
subterranean  winds,  and  agrees  with  a  previous  writer  in 
regarding  them  as  the  result  of  the  penetration  of  water 
from  the  surface  into  the  interior  of  the  hill.  He  thus 
recognized  the  efficacy  of  subterranean  as  well  as  superficial 
water,  in  changing  the  face  of  a  country. 

He  believed  the  sea  to  be  the  most  potent  destroyer  of 
the  land,  and  as  an  instance  of  its  power  he  was  accustomed 
to  regard  the  chalk  cliffs  of  the  north-west  of  France  as 
the  relics  of  a  great  chain  of  hills,  of  which  the  greater  part 
had  been  swept  away  by  the  sea.2  He  shows,  further, 
that  while  the  hills  are  worn  down  by  the  waves,  by  the 
rains,  and  by  the  inundations  to  which  the  rains  give  rise, 
the  materials  removed  from  them  are  not  destroyed,  but 
are  deposited  either  on  the  land  or  along  the  shores  of  the 
sea.8  He  further  points  out  that  the  detritus  of  separate 
river-basins  may  greatly  differ,  and  that  materials  may  be 
carried  into  districts  where  the  rocks  are  entirely  distinct 
from  those  in  the  areas  whence  the  transport  has  taken 
place.  He  refers  to  the  practical  value  of  this  observation 
in  questions  regarding  the  source  of  minerals,  ores  and 
useful  stones.4 

He  is  thus  led  to  give,  from  his  wide  knowledge  of 
France,  a  sketch  of  the  character  of  the  rocks  in  the 
different  river-basins  of  the  country,  and  the  nature  of  the 
materials  which  the  rivers  have  in  each  case  to  transport. 
He  passes  in  review  all  the  large  streams  that  enter  the 
Atlantic  from  the  Ehine  to  the  shores  of  Gascony,  and 

1  P.  214.  2  Pp.  220,  222.  3  P.  222.  4  P.  223. 


i  Guettard's  Physiographical  Geology         31 

considers,  likewise,  the  Khone  with  its  tributaries  on  the 
Mediterranean  side  of  the  watershed.1  He  infers  that  all 
the  debris  derived  from  the  waste  of  the  land  is  not  carried 
to  the  sea,  but  that  a  great  deal  of  it  is  deposited  along 
the  borders  of  the  streams,  and  that  though  it  may  be 
removed  thence,  this  removal  must  require  many  ages  to 
accomplish.  He  thinks  that  the  levels  of  the  valleys  are 
at  present  being  raised  owing  to  the  deposit  of  detritus  in 
them.2  The  plains  watered  by  the  rivers  are  one  vast 
sheet  of  gravel,  the  streams  having  changed  their  courses 
again  and  again,  so  as  to  flow  in  turn  over  every  part 
of  these  alluvial  tracts.  The  thickness  of  detritus  brought 
down  by  the  rivers  gradually  increases  towards  their 
mouths.  Near  their  sources,  on  the  other  hand,  any 
sediment  which  is  deposited  is  in  a  manner  superficial,  and 
is  liable  to  continued  removal  and  transportation  farther 
down. 

The  fragmentary  material  that  is  accumulated  along 
the  margin  of  the  sea  is,  in  Guettard's  view,  derived  either 
from  what  is  borne  down  by  rivers,  or  from  what  is  made 
by  the  sea  itself,  the  whole  being  ground  into  powder  by 
"the  long-continued  beating  of  the  waves.  The  sea  not 
only  acts  on  its  shores,  but  on  submerged  rocks,  and  the 
detritus  thus  produced  is  mingled  with  the  triturated 
remains  of  corals,  shells,  fish-bones  and  marine  plants.3 

Comparatively  little  information  had  been  gathered  in 
Guettard's  time  as  to  the  condition  of  the  sea-bottom. 
There  is  thus  a  peculiar  interest  in  noting  the  ideas  which 
he  expresses  on  this  subject.  He  thinks  that,  besides  what 
is  laid  down  upon  the  shore,  another  portion  of  the  detritus 

1  Pp.  225-324.  2  P.  326.  3  P.  328. 


32  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

is  borne  away  seawards,  and  gradually  settles  down  on  the 
sea-floor.  As  the  nature  of  the  part  so  transported  must 
depend  on  that  of  the  material  on  the  shore,  he  is  led  to 
enter  upon  a  minute  examination  of  the  mineral  constitu- 
tion of  the  coast-lines  of  France,  both  on  the  Atlantic  and 
Mediterranean  margins  of  the  country.1 

He  recognizes  that  soluble  substances  may  be  carried 
for  great  distances  from  the  land,  and  may  remain  dissolved 
in  the  sea-water  for  a  very  long  time.  He  even  conjectures 
that  it  is  possibly  these  substances  that  impart  its  salinity 
to  sea- water.2 

From  all  the  soundings  available  in  his  day,  he  con- 
cludes that  the  bottom  of  the  sea  is,  throughout  its  whole 
extent,  covered  mostly  with  sand,  which  is  probably  not 
derived  from  the  detritus  of  rivers.3  He  observes,  regard- 
ing this  widely-diffused  deposit,  that  it  might  be  thought 
to  be  due  to  the  grinding  down  of  submarine  rocks  by  the 
sea  itself.  But  he  contends  that  "  how  violent  soever  may 
be  the  movements  of  the  sea,  they  can  have  but  little  effect, 
save  on  those  rocks  which  emerge  above"  the  level  of  the 
water,  the  greatest  storms  being  little  felt  except  on  the 
surface,  and  for  a  short  way  below  it."  In  this  sagacious 
and  generally  accurate  inference,  however,  he  was  long 
before  anticipated  by  Boyle. 

Considering,  further,  the  problem  presented  by  the 
general  diffusion  of  sand  over  the  bed  of  the  sea,  he  thinks 
that  the  erosive  influence  of  the  ocean  cannot  be  enough 
to  account  for  this  deposit,  which  is  spread  over  so  vast  an 
area.  He  concludes,  therefore,  that  the  sand  must  date 
back  to  the  remote  ages  of  the  destruction  of  the  mountains. 

1  P.  328.  2  P.  360.  3  P.  401. 


i  G^lettard>s  Physiographical  Geology         33 

The  submarine  rocks  met  with  in  sounding  are,  he  thinks, 
unquestionably  the  remains  of  mountains  formerly  de- 
stroyed, and  the  detached  boulders  similarly  discovered 
are  no  doubt  the  result  of  the  destruction  of  these  rocks, 
or  in  some  cases  they  may  have  been  derived  from  neigh- 
bouring islands  where  such  exist.1 

No  argument  against  this  view  of  the  high  antiquity 
of  the  sandy  sediment  on  the  sea-floor  can,  he  believes, 
be  drawn  from  the  presence  of  shells,  either  singly  or  in 
numbers,  in  this  sand.  These  he  regards  as  obviously  the 
relics  of  molluscs  of  the  present  time,  those  of  former  ages 
having  been  long  ago  destroyed.2 

He  remarks,  in  conclusion,  that  "it  follows,  from  all 
the  observations  here  recited,  that  the  deposits  laid  down 
by  the  sea  along  its  shores  are  sandy  and  loamy ;  that 
these  deposits  do  not  extend  far  out  to  sea ;  that,  conse- 
quently, the  elevation  of  new  mountains  in  the  sea  by  the 
deposition  of  sediment  is  a  process  very  difficult  to  con- 
ceive ;  that  the  transport  of  the  sediment  as  far  as  the 
equator  is  not  less  improbable  ;  and  that  still  more  difficult 
to  accept  is  the  suggestion  that  the  sediment  from  our 
continent  is  carried  into  the  seas  of  the  New  World.  In 
short,  we  are  still  very  little  advanced  towards  the  theory 
of  the  earth  as  it  now  exists.  All  the  systems  which  have 
been  devised  in  this  subject  are  full  of  difficulties  which 
appear  to  me  to  be  insoluble."  He  proposes,  finally,  to 
return,  should  the  occasion  present  itself,  to  these  questions, 
which  are  "  all  the  more  interesting  the  more  difficult  they 
are  to  elucidate." 3 

It   cannot   be   claimed  that   such   enlightened   views 

1  Pp.  401,  402.  2  P.  402.  3  Pp.  402,  403. 

D 


34  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

regarding  the  subaerial  degradation  of  the  land  were  now  for 
the  first  time  proclaimed  to  the  world.  Guettard  had  been 
to  some  extent  preceded  by  the  English  naturalist  Eay, 
who,  some  ninety  years  before,  had  briefly  alluded  to  the 
manifest  action  of  "rains  continually  washing  down  and 
carrying  away  earth  from  the  mountains,"  and  to  the 
destruction  of  the  shores  by  the  continual  working  of  the 
sea,  and  who  believed  that  in  the  end,  by  the  combination 
of  these  processes,  the  whole  dry  land  might  possibly  be 
reduced  below  the  sea-level.1 

Generelli,  too,  in  his  defence  of  Lazzaro  Moro,  twenty 
years  before  the  appearance  of  Guettard's  volume,  had,  with 
great  eloquence,  dwelt  on  the  evidence  of  the  constant 
degradation  of  the  mountains  by  running  water  as  an 
argument  for  the  existence  of  some  other  natural  cause, 
whereby,  from  time  to  time,  land  was  upraised  to  com- 
pensate for  the  universal  waste.  It  must  be  admitted, 
however,  that  no  one  had  elaborated  the  subject  so  fully 
until  it  was  taken  up  by  the  French  observer,  and  that 
he  was  the  first  to  discuss  the  whole  phenomena  of 
denudation,  apart  altogether  from  theory,  as  a  great  domain 
for  accurate  and  prolonged  observation. 

I  have  reserved  for  mention  in  the  last  place  the  dis- 
covery for  which  chiefly  Guettard's  name  has  received  such 
mention  as  has  been  accorded  to  it  in  English  scientific 
literature.  He  was  the  first  to  ascertain  the  existence  of 
a  group  of  old  volcanoes  in  the  heart  of  France.  This 
contribution  to  the  geology  of  the  time  may  seem  in  itself 

1  Miscellaneous  Discourses  concerning  the  Dissolution  and  Changes  of 
the  World,  by  John  Ray,  Fellow  of  the  Royal  Society,  London,  1692, 
pp.  44-56. 


i  Guettard  in  Auvergne  35 

of  comparatively  small  moment,  but  it  proved  to  be 
another  important  onward  step  made  by  the  same  inde- 
fatigable and  clear  -  sighted  naturalist,  and  laid  the 
foundations  of  another  department  of  the  natural  history 
of  the  earth.  It  proved  also  to  be  the  starting-point  of 
one  of  the  great  scientific  controversies  of  the  latter  half 
of  the  last,  and  the  first  decades  of  the  present,  century. 
There  is  thus  a  peculiar  interest  in  watching  how  the 
discovery  was  made  and  worked  out  by  the  original 
observer. 

The  story  goes  back  to  the  early  months  of  1752,  for 
on  the  10th  of  May  of  that  year  Guettard  read  to  the 
Academy  a  "  Memoir  on  Certain  Mountains  in  France  which 
have  once  been  Volcanoes."  l  He  tells  how  he  had  under- 
taken further  journeys  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  addi- 
tional information  towards  the  correction  and  amplification  of 
his  map  of  France,  showing  the  distribution  of  his  "  bands  " 
with  their  characteristic  minerals.  He  was  accompanied 
by  his  former  school-fellow  and  then  his  valued  friend, 
Malesherbes.  On  reaching  Moulins  on  the  Allier,  he  was 
struck  by  the  nature  of  the  black  stone  employed  for  mile- 
posts,  and  felt  certain  that  it  must  be  of  volcanic  origin. 
On  inquiring  whence  the  material  came,  and  learning 
that  it  was  brought  from  Volvic,  "  Volvic  ! "  he  exclaimed, 
"  Yolcani  Vicus  ! "  and  at  once  determined  to  make  with- 
out delay  for  this  probably  volcanic  centre.2  His  excitement 

1  M6m.  Acad.  Hoy.  Science,  vol.  for  1756,  p.  27. 

2  Twenty-eight  years  after  this  discovery  Guettard  found  himself  forced 
to  defend  his  claim  to  be  the  discoverer  of  the  old  volcanoes  of  Central 
France,  and  to  ask  his  friend  Malesherbes  for  his  testimony  to  the  justice 
of  that  claim.     Malesherbes  accordingly  wrote  him  a  letter  giving  an 
account  of  their  journey  to  Auvergne,  which  Guettard  printed  in  the  pre- 
face to  his  treatise,  in  two  volumes,  on  the  mineralogy  of  Dauphine.     It 


36  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

in  the  chase  after  an  unknown  volcano  seems  to  have  in- 
creased with  every  step  of  the  journey,  as  more  and  more 
of  the  dark  stone  appeared  in  the  buildings  by  the  road- 
side. At  Eiom  he  found  the  town  almost  entirely  built 
of  the  material,  which  he  felt  sure  he  had  now  run  nearly 
to  earth.  Learning  that  the  quarries  were  still  some  two 
leagues  distant,  he  pushed  on  to  them,  and  great  was  his 
delight  to  find  all  his  suspicions  amply  confirmed.  He 
recognized  the  rock  as  a  solidified  current  of  lava  which 
had  flowed  down  from  the  high  granitic  ridge  for  some 
five  English  miles  into  the  plain  below,  and  he  found  the 
actual  cone  and  crater  from  which  the  molten  flood  had 
issued. 

We  can  follow  the  enthusiastic  explorer  with  warm 
sympathy  as  he  eagerly  and  joyously  sees  at  each  onward 
step  some  fresh  evidence  of  the  true  volcanic  nature  of  the 
rocks  around  him.  Though  he  had  never  beheld  a  volcano, 
he  was  familiar  with  their  outlines  from  the  available 
engravings  of  the  time.  Ascending  a  hill  beyond  the 
quarries,  he  recognizes  its  conical  form  as  that  of  a  typical 
volcano.1  As  he  climbs  the  rough  slopes,  he  identifies  the 
crumbling  debris  of  black  and  red  pumice,  together  with 
the  blocks  of  rugged  spongy  slags  and  scoriae,  as  manifestly 
the  products  of  a  once  active  volcanic  vent.  When  he 
reached  the  truncated  summit  of  the  hill,  what  must  have 

is  curious  that,  with  the  statements  of  the  two  travellers  long  ago  in 
print,  Scrope  should  have  published  a  totally  inaccurate  version  of  the 
journey  in  the  first  edition  of  his  Volcanoes  of  Central  France,  and  should 
have  repeated  it  in  the  second  edition. 

1  Desmarest  affirms  that  it  was  not  the  Puy  de  la  Nugere,  the  source 
of  the  Volvic  lava,  which  Guettard  ascended,  but  the  Puy  de  la  Banniere, 
and  that  the  former  hill  was  unknown  to  him,  Encydopedie  Methodique, 
Geographic  Physique,  vol.  i.  p.  187. 


i  Guettard  in  Auvergne  37 

been  his  delight  when  he  saw  below  him  the  smooth-sloped 
hollow  of  the  crater,  not  now  belching  forth  hot  vapours  and 
ashes,  but  silent  and  carpeted  with  grass !  For  centuries 
the  shepherds  had  pastured  their  flocks  on  these  slopes, 
and  the  quarrymen  had  been  busy  cutting  and  sending  off 
the  lava  for  roads  and  buildings,  but  no  one  had  ever 
suspected  that  this  quiet  and  lonely  spot  retained  such 
striking  monuments  of  subterranean  commotion. 

Descending  to  the  great  lava-stream,  Guettard  scruti- 
nized its  structure  as  laid  open  in  the  quarries,  and  at 
once  noticed  how  different  in  character  it  was  from  any 
other  rock  he  had  ever  seen  in  France.  He  observed  it 
to  be  divided  into  sheets  inclined  with  the  general  slope 
of  the  ground,  but  separated  from  each  other  by  layers  of 
clay,  earth  or  sand,  as  in  the  case  of  sedimentary  forma- 
tions, yet  solid,  and  breaking  easily  in  any  direction,  so 
as  to  lend  itself  readily  to  the  arts  of  the  stone-mason. 

Travelling  southward  along  the  base  of  the  picturesque 
ridge  of  the  Puys,  Guettard  and  Malesherbes  reached 
Clermont,  where  they  procured  the  services  of  an  intel- 
ligent apothecary,  who  had  some  knowledge  of  the  topo- 
graphy of  the  hills.  They  climbed  the  steep  slopes  of  the 
Puy  de  Dome — a  hill  made  famous  by  Pascal.  Every- 
where they  noticed  volcanic  debris  partially  concealed 
under  vegetation.  If  the  view  from  the  first  volcano 
above  Volvic  delighted  the  travellers,  we  can  imagine 
their  amazement  and  pleasure  when  the  marvellous  pano- 
rama around  the  highest  craterless  summit  spread  itself 
like  a  map  around  them.  As  their  eyes  ranged  over  that 
array  of  old  volcanoes,  so  perfect  in  form  that  it  is  difficult 
to  believe  them  to  have  been  silent  ever  since  the  begin- 


38  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

ning  of  human  history,  they  could  mark  the  cones  rising 
one  behind  the  other  in  long  procession  on  the  granite 
ridge,  each  bearing  its  cup-shaped  crater  atop. 

In  descending  from  the  mountain  they  came  upon 
another  crater,  probably  that  of  the  Petit  Puy  de  Dome, 
a  singularly  perfect  example  of  the  type,  some  300  feet 
deep,  and  the  same  in  diameter  of  rim,  with  such  regular 
and  smooth  slopes  that  it  has  been  named  by  the  shep- 
herds the  Hen's  Nest.  Everywhere  they  encountered 
quantities  of  pumice,  which  so  entirely  convinced  Guet- 
tard  of  the  true  volcanic  nature  of  the  district,  that  he 
found  it  unnecessary  for  his  immediate  purpose  to  ex- 
amine the  rest  of  the  puys.  Their  Clermont  guide,  though 
he  had  previously  wandered  over  the  hills,  had  never 
suspected  their  volcanic  origin;  but  he  seems  to  have 
learnt  his  lesson  promptly,  for  he  soon  afterwards,  at 
Guettard's  request,  sent  some  details,  and  wrote  about 
eruptions  and  explosions  as  if  he  had  been  long  familiar 
with  their  effects. 

Not  only  did  Guettard  detect  some  sixteen  or  seven- 
teen cones,  but  he  observed  that  their  craters  looked  in 
different  directions,  and  he  thought  that  they  probably 
belonged  to  different  periods  of  eruption.  The  travellers 
pushed  on  to  the  great  volcanic  centre  of  Mont  Dore. 
But  Guettard  was  there  less  successful.  He  was  unaware 
of  the  influence  of  long-continued  denudation  in  altering 
the  external  forms  of  volcanic  hills,  and  was  disposed  to 
regard  his  ill  success  as  probably  due  to  the  mantle  of 
vegetation  by  which  so  much  of  the  ground  was  concealed. 

The  journey  in  Auvergne  was  too  brief  and  hurried  to 
admit  of  any  single  point  being  fully  worked  out.  But 


i          Guettard  and  the  Auvergne  Volcanoes       39 

Guettard  believed  that  he  had  amassed  material  enough  to 
prove  the  main  question  which  interested  him — that  there 
had  formerly  been  a  series  of  active  volcanoes  in  the  heart 
of  France.  So  he  prepared  an  account  of  his  observations, 
and  read  it  to  the  Academy  of  Sciences  on  10th  May  1752. 
This  early  memoir  on  the  extinct  volcanoes  of  Europe 
must  not  be  tried  by  the  standard  which  has  now  been 
attained  in  the  elucidation  of  volcanic  rocks  and  the 
phenomena  of  ancient  eruptions.  We  should  be  unjust  if 
we  judged  it  by  the  fuller  knowledge  obtained  of  the 
same  region  of  France  by  the  more  detailed  examination 
of  other  observers  even  in  Guettard's  lifetime.  Desmarest, 
to  whose  splendid  achievements  I  shall  refer  in  my  next 
lecture,  was  conspicuously  guilty  of  this  injustice.  He 
would  never  allow  Guettard  credit  for  his  work  in 
Auvergne,  finding  fault  with  it  because  it  was  imperfect 
and  inaccurate.  He  wished  that,  before  writing  on  the 
subject  at  all,  his  predecessor  had  studied  the  ground 
more  carefully  and  in  greater  detail,  and  had  attended  to 
the  different  conditions  and  dates  of  the  eruptions.  "  Can 
we  regard  as  a  true  discovery,"  he  asks,  "  the  simple 
recognition  of  the  products  of  volcanic  action,  when  the 
facts  are  presented  with  so  little  order  and  so  much  con- 
fusion ?  Such  a  discovery  implies  a  reasoned  analysis  of 
all  the  operations  of  fire,  of  which  the  results  have  been 
studied,  so  as  to  reveal  the  ancient  conditions  of  all  the 
volcanic  regions.  Without  this  it  is  impossible  to  dignify 
the  recognition  of  a  few  stones  with  the  name  of  a  dis- 
covery that  will  advance  the  progress  of  the  natural  his- 
tory of  the  earth." 1  Could  any  judgment  be  more  unfair  ? 

1  Geographic  Physique,  Art.  "Guettard." 


4O  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

As  if  no  discovery  was  entitled  to  the  name  unless  it  had 
been  elaborated  in  the  fullest  detail  and  followed  to  its 
remotest  consequences.  When  one  of  Guettard's  country- 
men and  contemporaries  could  write  thus  of  his  claims  to 
recognition,  it  is  not  surprising  that  for  the  best  part  of 
a  century  his  name  should  have  almost  entirely  passed 
out  of  mind. 

That  Guettard  preceded  every  one  else  in  the  recognition 
of  the  old  volcanoes  of  Auvergne,  and  that  he  thus  became 
the  originator  of  the  Vulcanist  party  in  the  famous  warfare 
of  the  end  of  last  century,  in  no  way  diminishes  the  claim 
of  Desmarest  to  occupy  the  foremost  place  among  the 
Vulcanists  and  to  be  ranked  as  the  real  founder  of  volcanic 
geology.  I  shall  have  occasion  to  dwell  at  some  length 
on  Desmarest's  work,  which  for  accuracy  and  breadth  has 
never  been  surpassed. 

Guettard,  having  never  seen  a  volcano,  was  guided  in 
his  observations  and  inferences  by  what  he  had  read  of 
volcanic  countries,  and  what  he  had  learnt  about  lavas  by 
familiarity  with  specimens  of  these  rocks  brought  from 
Vesuvius  and  other  modern  volcanoes.  He  noted  the  close 
resemblance  between  the  rocks  of  Auvergne  and  the  Italian 
lavas,  not  only  in  appearance,  density  and  other  characters, 
but  in  their  position  on  the  ground,  the  specimens  which 
he  had  gathered  from  the  bottom,  sides  and  crests  of  the 
puys  having  each  their  own  distinctive  peculiarities,  as  in 
existing  volcanoes.  He  compared  the  curved  lines  on  some 
of  the  rocks  of  Mont  Dore  and  the  Puy  de  Dome  with  the 
ropy  crusts  of  certain  Vesuvian  lavas. 

When  this  distinguished  man  stepped  from  the  observa- 
tion of  fact  into  the  region  of  theory,  he  at  once  fell  into 


i  Guettard's  Volcanic  Theory  41 

error,  but  the  error  was  general  in  his  time,  and  was  shared 
in  by  his  most  illustrious  contemporaries.  "  For  the  pro- 
duction of  volcanoes,"  he  remarks,  "  it  is  enough  that  there 
should  be  within  these  mountains  substances  that  can  burn, 
such  as  petroleum,  coal  or  bitumen,  and  that  from  some 
cause  these  materials  should  take  fire.  Thereupon  the 
mountain  will  become  a  furnace,  and  the  fire,  raging 
furiously  within,  will  be  able  to  melt  and  vitrify  the  most 
intractable  substances."  *  He  finds  evidence  in  Auvergne 
of  this  presumed  connection  between  the  combustion  of 
carbonaceous  substances  and  volcanic  eruptions,  and  he  cites 
in  illustration  the  Puy  de  Crouel  and  Puy  de  la  Poix,  near 
Clermont,  where  the  black  bituminous  material  can  actually 
be  seen  at  the  surface.  Summing  up  his  observations  he 
concludes  thus  :  "  I  do  not  believe  that  the  reality  of  our 
volcanoes  will  now  be  called  in  question,  save  perhaps 
from  anxiety  for  the  safety  of  the  districts  around  them. 
For  myself,  confident  as  to  the  first  point,  I  confess  that  I 
share  in  the  anxiety  regarding  the  second.  Hot  springs 
have  generally  been  regarded  as  due  to  some  kind  of 
concealed  volcanoes.  Those  of  Mont  Dore  rise  at  the  very 
foot  of  the  mountains ;  those  of  Clermont  are  only  some 
two  leagues  from  the  chain  of  the  Puys.  It  may  very  well 
be  that  their  high  temperature  is  kept  up  by  the  same 
internal  fires  which  formerly  had  a  communication  with 
these  extinct  volcanoes,  or  might  now  easily  establish  one 
should  they  increase  in  activity." 2 

His  fears  for  the  safety  of  the  Auvernois  were  by  no 

1  Trans.  Ray.   Acad.   Sciences  for  1756,  p.   52.      This  suggestion   is 
severely  criticized  by  Desmarest,  but  it  was  subsequently  adopted  by 
Werner,  and  became  a  prominent  item  in  the  Wernerian  creed. 

2  Op.  dt.  p.  53. 


42  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

means  shared  by  the  people  themselves,  for  they  refused 
to  believe  that  the  Puys,  which  they  had  known  from 
infancy  as  quiet,  well-behaved  hills,  had  ever  been  anything 
else,  and  they  looked  upon  the  learned  doctor's  descriptions 
of  the  former  eruptions  as  mere  speculation  of  his  own 
manufacture. 

In  taking  leave  of  Guettard's  scientific  labours,  I  must 
refer  to  one  further  essay  of  his,  on  account  of  its  connec- 
tion with  his  work  among  the  old  volcanoes  of  Auvergne. 
Eighteen  years  after  his  memoir  on  these  hills  had  been 
read  to  the  Academy,  he  published  a  paper  "  On  the  Basalt 
of  the  Ancients  and  the  Moderns."  *  The  furious  war  over 
the  origin  of  basalt,  of  which  I  shall  give  some  account  in 
another  lecture,  had  not  yet  definitely  begun.  Various 
writers  had  maintained  that  this  rock  is  of  volcanic  origin, 
and  we  might  have  supposed  that  Guettard's  experience  in 
Auvergne  would  have  led  him  to  adopt  this  correct  opinion. 
So  far  from  doing  so,  however,  he  entered  into  an  elaborate 
discussion  to  show  that  basalt  could  not  be  a  volcanic  rock. 
He  admitted  that  it  is  found  among  volcanic  masses,  but 
he  accounted  for  its  presence  there  by  supposing  that  in 
some  cases  it  was  already  in  that  position  before  the  erup- 
tions, in  others  that  it  had  been  laid  down  upon  the  lavas 
after  they  had  consolidated.  "  If  a  columnar  basalt  can  be 
produced  by  a  volcano,"  he  asks,  "  why  do  we  not  find  it 
among  the  recent  eruptions  of  Vesuvius  and  other  active 
volcanoes?"  After  reviewing  all  that  had  then  been 
written  on  the  subject,  he  concludes  that  "basalt  is  a 
species  of  vitrifiable  rock,  formed  by  crystallization  in  an 

1  Mimoires  sur  difftrentes  parties  des  Sciences  et  Arts,  tome  ii.  p.  226 
(1770). 


i  Guettard  and  the  later  Schools  43 

aqueous  fluid,  and  that  there  is  no  reason  to  regard  it  as 
due  to  igneous  fusion." 1 

We  may  gather  how  little  was  then  known  of  the 
characters  of  modern  lavas  when  Guettard  was  ignorant  of 
the  occurrence  of  columnar  structure  among  them.2  He 
was  as  hopelessly  wrong  in  regard  to  the  origin  of  basalt, 
as  he  was  with  respect  to  the  nature  of  volcanic  action. 
How  this  error  originated  will  appear  in  an  examination  of 
the  controversy  to  which  basalt  gave  rise.  But  the  most 
interesting  feature  in  the  passage  just  cited  from  Guettard 
is  not  his  mistake  about  basalt,  but  his  clear  enunciation 
of  his  belief  in  its  deposition  from  aqueous  solution,  for  he 
thus  forestalled  Werner  in  one  of  the  most  keenly  disputed 
parts  of  his  geognosy. 

I  know  nothing  more  whimsical  in  the  history  of  geo- 
logy than  that  the  same  man  should  be  the  parent  of  two 
diametrically  opposite  schools.  Guettard's  observations  in 
Auvergne  practically  started  the  Vulcanist  camp,  and  his 
promulgated  tenets  regarding  basalt  became  the  watchword 
of  the  Neptunists. 

The  notable  Frenchman,  of  whose  work  I  have  now  at- 
tempted to  give  an  outline,  must  have  been  a  singular  figure 
'  as  he  moved  about  among  his  contemporaries.  Endowed 
with  a  healthy  constitution,  he  had  strengthened  it  by  travel, 
and  by  a  hard  and  sober  life.  At  last  he  became  liable 
to  attacks  of  a  heavy  lethargic  sleep,  during  one  of  which 
his  foot  was  burnt.  The  long  and  painful  healing  of  the 
wound  he  bore  with  stoical  patience,  though  often  convinced 
of  the  uselessness  of  the  remedies  applied.  "  I  see  quite 

1  Op.  cit.  p.  268. 

2  We  shall  find  that  this  ignorance  continued  for  many  years  after 
Guettard's  time,  and  was  characteristic  of  the  Wernerian  school. 


44  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

well,"  he  would  say,  "  that  they  want  to  ward  off  the  stroke ; 
but  they  will  not  succeed."  The  idea  of  the  kind  of  death 
that  would  terminate  his  life  never  left  his  mind,  but  did 
not  in  the  least  affect  his  cheerfulness.  He  continued  to 
come  assiduously  to  the  meetings  of  the  Academy  of 
Sciences  alone  and  on  foot,  taking  only  the  precaution  to 
carry  in  his  pocket  his  full  address,  that  in  case  of  anything 
happening  to  him,  he  might  be  taken  home.  By  degrees 
lie  declined  to  dine  with  his  friends,  and  then  went  seldom  to 
see  them,  quietly  assigning  as  his  excuse  the  fear  of  troubling 
them  with  the  sight  of  his  death.  He  passed  away  at  last 
on  the  7th  of  January  1786  at  the  age  of  seventy-one  years. 
The  kindly  doge  of  Condorcet  enables  us  to  form  some 
idea  of  the  character  and  peculiarities  of  the  man.  From 
his  childhood  onwards  he  was  eminently  religious.  His 
nature  was  thoroughly  frank  and  honest,  simple  and 
unambitious.  Scrupulously  exact  in  his  own  dealings 
with  fact,  he  hated  everything  savouring  in  the  least  of 
insincerity  and  subterfuge.  His  transparent  sincerity 
gained  him  friends  everywhere;  yet  he  was  readily 
irritated,  and  had  a  certain  brusqueness  of  manner,  which 
perhaps  detracted  from  the  charm  of  his  character  and  led 
to  his  being  sometimes  much  misunderstood.  One  of  his 
acquaintances  once  thanked  him  for  having  given  a  vote  in 
his  favour.  "You  owe  me  nothing  for  that,"  was  Guettard's 
abrupt  reply.  "  If  I  had  not  believed  that  it  was  right  to 
give  it  to  you,  you  should  not  have  had  it ;  for  I  don't  like 
you."  Condorcet  tells  how,  when  they  met  at  the  Academy 
on  the  occasion  of  the  delivery  of  the  customary  doges 
of  deceased  members,  Guettard,  who  looked  on  all  these 
things  as  unveracious  statements,  would  say  to  the 


i  Personal  Traits  of  Guettard  45 

perpetual  Secretary,  "  You  are  going  to  tell  a  lot  of  lies. 
When  it  comes  to  my  turn  I  want  only  the  truth  told 
about  me."  Condorcet,  in  sketching  the  defects  as  well  as 
the  excellences  of  his  friend's  character,  remarks  that  in 
fulfilling  his  wishes  in  the  strictest  sense,  he  is  rendering 
to  Guettard  the  homage  that  he  himself  would  most  have 
desired.  So  little  did  he  try  to  seem  better  than  he  was 
that  his  defects  might  be  most  prominent  to  those  who 
only  casually  met  him,  while  his  sterling  qualities  were 
known  only  to  his  friends.  "  Those  who  knew  Guettard 
merely  by  some  brusque  answer  or  other  indication  of  bad 
temper,"  his  biographer  remarks,  "  would  be  surprised  to 
learn  that  this  man,  so  severe  in  appearance,  so  hard  to 
please,  forced  by  the  circumstances  of  his  position  to  live 
alone,  had  actually  adopted  the  large  family  of  a  woman 
who  had  been  his  servant,  brought  up  the  children  and 
watched  over  the  smallest  details  of  their  education  ;  that 
he  could  never  see  any  one  in  distress  without  not  only 
coming  to  his  help,  but  even  weeping  with  him.  He  bore 
the  same  sensibility  towards  animals  also,  and  expressly 
forbade  that  any  living  creature  should  be  killed  for  him 
or  at  his  house.  He  was  a  man  who,  losing  control  of  his 
words  when  in  bad  humour,  had  quarrelled  more  than  once 
with  each  of  his  friends,  yet  had  always  ended  by  loving 
them  and  being  loved  more  than  ever  by  them ;  who  had 
hurt  most  of  his  associates  in  his  disputes  with  them,  but 
yet  had  preserved  the  friendship  of  several  of  them,  and 
had  never  diminished  in  any  one  of  them  the  esteem  which 
it  was  impossible  to  refuse  to  his  character  and  his  virtues." x 
Guettard's  position  in  the  history  of  science  is  that  of 

1  Condorcet's  filoge,  pp.  238,  240. 


46  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT.  i 

an  indefatigable  and  accurate  observer  who,  gifted  with  a 
keen  eye,  well-trained  powers  of  investigation,  and  much 
originality  of  mind,  opened  up  new  paths  in  a  number  of 
fields  which  have  since  been  fruitfully  cultivated,  but 
who  rigidly  abstained  from  theory  or  speculation.  In 
geology,  he  deserves  to  be  specially  remembered  as  the 
first  to  construct,  however  imperfectly,  geological  maps, 
the  first  to  make  known  the  existence  of  extinct  vol- 
canoes in  Central  France,  and  one  of  the  first  to  see  the 
value  of  organic  remains  as  geological  monuments,  and  to 
prepare  detailed  descriptions  and  figures  of  them.  To 
him  also  are  due  some  of  the  earliest  luminous  sugges- 
tions on  the  denudation  of  the  land  by  the  atmospheric 
and  marine  agents.  "By  his  minute  and  laborious  re- 
searches he  did  more  to  advance  the  true  theory  of  the 
earth  (on  which,  however,  he  never  allowed  himself  to 
hazard  a  single  conjecture)  than  the  philosophers  who  have 
racked  their  brains  to  devise  those  brilliant  hypotheses, 
the  phantoms  of  a  moment,  which  the  light  of  truth  soon 
remands  into  eternal  oblivion."  -1 

1  Condorcet's  filoge. 


LECTUEE   II 

The  rise  of  volcanic  geology — Desmarest — Else  of  geological 
travel — Pallas,  De  Saussure. 

THE  leading  position  taken  by  France  in  the  investigation 
of  the  history  of  the  earth  was  well  maintained  in  the  later 
decades  of  last  century.  Geology  as  a  distinct  science  did 
not  yet  exist.  The  study  of  rocks  and  their  contents  was 
known  as  mineralogy,  which  as  a  pursuit,  often  of  economic 
value,  had  been  in  vogue  for  centuries.  The  idea  that 
beyond  the  mere  variety  of  its  mineral  contents,  the  crust 
of  the  earth  contained  a  record  of  the  earth's  evolution,  for 
many  ages  before  the  advent  of  man,  only  very  slowly  took 
definite  shape.  Buffon  partly  realized  it ;  Guettard  had  a 
fuller  perception  of  its  nature,  though  he  failed  to  observe 
proofs  of  a  long  succession  of  changes  earlier  than  the 
present  condition  of  the  surface. 

One  of  the  most  valuable  parts  of  Guettard's  work  was 
his  recognition  of  the  existence  of  volcanic  rocks  in  regions 
far  removed  from  any  active  volcano.  We  have  seen  that 
he  was  led  to  this  important  deduction  by  a  train  of 
observation  and  inference,  and  that  although  he  never 
worked  out  the  subject  in  detail,  the  credit  of  the  first 
discovery,  denied  to  him  in  his  lifetime  and  after  it,  must 
in  common  fairness  be  assigned  to  him. 


48  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Central  France  was  the  region  that  furnished  Guettard 
with  his  proofs  of  extinct  volcanoes.  It  was  the  same 
region  that  afterwards  supplied  fuel  to  the  controversy  over 
the  origin .  of  basalt  which  raged  with  fury  for  so  many 
years.  The  story  of  this  old  battle  is  full  of  interest  and 
instruction.  We  learn  from  it  how  the  advance  of  truth 
may  be  impeded  by  personal  authority  ;  how,  under  guise 
of  the  most  rigorous  induction  from  fact,  the  most  perverse 
theories  may  be  supported ;  how,  under  the  influence  of 
theoretical  preconceptions,  the  obvious  meaning  and  rela- 
tions of  phenomena  may  be  lost  sight  of,  and  how,  even 
in  the  realm  of  science,  dry  questions  of  interpretation 
may  become  the  source  of  cruel  misrepresentation  and 
personal  animosity. 

To  understand  the  history  of  this  controversy,  we  must 
trace  the  career  of  another  illustrious  Frenchman  who, 
with  less  opportunity  for  scientific  work  than  Guettard, 
less  ample  qualifications  in  all  departments  of  natural 
science,  and  less  promptitude  in  putting  the  results  of  his 
observations  into  tangible  form,  has  nevertheless  gained 
for  himself  an  honoured  place  among  the  founders  of 
modern  geology. 

Nicholas  Desmarest  (1725-1815)  was  born  in  humble  cir- 
cumstances at  Soulaines,  a  little  town  in  France  between 
Bar-sur-Aube  and  Brienne,  on  16th  September  1725.1 
He  was  thus  exactly  ten  years  younger  than  Guettard.  So 
pinched  were  the  conditions  of  his  youth  that  he  could 
hardly  read  even  when  fifteen  years  old.  From  that  time,  on 
the  death  of  his  father,  better  prospects  dawned  upon  him. 

1  The  biographical  details  of  this  sketch  are  taken  from  the  well-known 
eloquent  filoge]  of  Desmarest  by  Cuvier,  Eecueil  dcs  filoges  Historiques, 
edit.  1819,  vol.  ii.  p.  339. 


ii  Early  Career  of  Desmarest  49 

The  parish  priest  urged  his  guardian  to  have  him  educated 
as  far  as  the  slender  means  left  for  his  sustenance  would 
allow.  He  was  accordingly  sent  to  the  college  of  the 
Oratorians  of  Troyes;  but  the  pittance  available  for  his 
benefit  was  exhausted  by  the  first  few  terms  of  his  stay 
there.  He  had,  however,  made  such  marked  progress  that 
his  teachers,  interested  in  his  career,  were  glad  to  continue 
gratuitously  the  instruction  for  which  he  could  no  longer 
pay.  At  the  end  of  his  time  with  them,  they  passed  him 
on  to  their  brethren  in  Paris. 

Having  made  some  advance,  especially  in  geometry  and 
physics,  he  was  able  to  support  himself  by  private  teach- 
ing and  other  labours  which,  however,  barely  provided  the 
necessaries  of  life.  After  some  ten  years  of  this  drudgery, 
the  studies  which  had  been  his  occupation  and  solace,  came 
at  last  to  be  the  means  of  opening  up  a  new  and  noble 
career  to  him. 

The  appearance  of  Buffon's  Theory  of  the  Earth,  in  1749, 
had  had  a  powerful  influence  in  France  in  directing  atten- 
tion to  the  revolutions  through  which  our  globe  has  passed. 
Among  the  results  of  this  influence,  a  society  which  had 
been  founded  at  Amiens  by  the  Due  de  Chaulnes,  proposed 
in  1753  a  prize  for  an  essay  on  the  question  whether 
England  and  France  had  ever  been  joined  together.  The 
subject  caught  Desmarest's  fancy,  he  made  some  investiga- 
tions, sent  in  an  essay  and  carried  off  the  prize. 

Cuvier,  in  his  Eloge,  remarks  on  the  strong  contrast 
between  the  way  in  which  Desmarest  approached  his  task 
and  that  in  which  Buffon,  who  had  aroused  public  attention 
to  these  subjects,  was  accustomed  to  deal  with  them.  The 
young  aspirant  to  fame,  then  twenty-eight  years  of  age, 


50  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

allowed  himself  no  hypothesis  or  theory.  He  would  not 
travel  beyond  the  positive  facts  and  the  inferences  that 
might  he  legitimately  deduced  from  them.  Dealing  with 
the  correspondence  between  the  material  forming  the  oppo- 
site cliffs  of  the  two  countries  (which  had  already  been 
pointed  out  by  Guettard),  and  with  the  form  of  the 
bottom  of  the  shallow  strait,  he  passed  on  to  consider  the 
former  prevalence  in  England  of  many  noxious  wild 
animals,  which  could  not  have  swum  across  the  sea,  and 
which  man  would  certainly  have  taken  care  not  to  intro- 
duce. From  a  review  of  all  the  considerations  which  the 
subject  presented,  he  drew  the  inference  that  a  neck  of 
land  must  once  have  connected  England  and  France,  and 
that  this  isthmus  was  eventually  cut  through  by  the  strong 
currents  of  the  North  Sea. 

This  essay,  so  different  in  tone  from  the  imaginative 
discourses  of  Buffon,  attracted  the  attention  of  D'Alembert, 
and  led  him  to  seek  the  acquaintance  of  its  author.  The 
friendship  of  this  great  man  was  itself  a  fortune,  for  it 
meant  an  introduction  into  the  most  learned,  intelligent, 
and  influential  society  of  the  day.  Desmarest  was  soon 
actively  employed  in  tasks  for  which  his  knowledge  and 
capacity  were  found  to  fit  him,  and  thenceforth  his  struggle 
with  poverty  came  to  an  end.  Among  those  who  be- 
friended him,  the  young  Due  de  la  Kochefoucault  was 
especially  helpful,  taking  him  on  his  travels  and  enabling 
him  to  see  much  of  France  and  Italy. 

Shortly  after  the  middle  of  last  century,  the  Govern- 
ments of  Europe,  wearied  with  ruinous  and  profitless  wars, 
began  to  turn  their  attention  towards  the  improvement  of 
the  industries  of  their  peoples.  The  French  Government 


ii  Desmarest  and  French  Industries          5 1 

especially  distinguished  itself  for  the  enlightened  views 
which  it  took  in  this  new  line  of  national  activity.  It 
sought  to  spread  throughout  the  kingdom  a  knowledge  of 
the  best  processes  of  manufacture,  and  to  introduce  what- 
ever was  found  to  be  superior  in  the  methods  of  foreign 
countries.  Desmarest  was  employed  on  this  mission  from 
1*757  onwards.  At  one  time  he  would  be  sent  to  in- 
vestigate the  cloth-making  processes  of  the  country  :  at 
another  to  study  the  various  methods  adopted  in  different 
districts  iri  the  manufacture  of  cheese.  Besides  being 
deputed  to  examine  into  the  condition  of  the  industries  of 
different  provinces  of  France,  he  undertook  two  journeys  to 
Holland  to  study  the  paper-making  system  of  that  country. 
He  prepared  elaborate  reports  of  the  results  of  his  investi- 
gations, which  were  published  in  the  Mtmoires  of  the 
Academic  des  Sciences,  or  in  the  Encydoptdie  Mtthodique. 
At  last  in  1788  he  was  named  by  the  King  Inspector- 
General  and  director  of  the  manufactures  of  France. 

He  continued  to  hold  this  office  until  the  time  of  the 
Eevolution,  when  his  political  friends — Trudaine,  Male- 
sherbes,  La  Eochefoucault,  and  others — perished  on  the 
scaffold  or  by  the  knife  of  the  assassin.  He  himself  was 
thrown  into  prison,  and  only  by  a  miracle  escaped  the 
slaughter  of  the  2nd  September.  After  the  troubles  were 
over,  he  was  once  more  called  to  assist  the  Government  of 
the  day  with  his  experience  and  judgment  in  all  matters 
connected  with  the  industrial  development  of  the  country. 
It  may  be  said  of  Desmarest  that  "  for  three  quarters  of  a 
century  it  was  under  his  eyes,  and  very  often  under  his 
influence,  that  French  industry  attained  so  great  a  develop- 
ment." 

UNIVERSITY  I 


5  2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Such  was  his  main  business  in  life,  and  the  manner  in 
which  he  performed  it  would  of  itself  entitle  him  to  the 
grateful  recollection  of  his  fellow-countrymen.  But  these 
occupations  did  not  wholly  engross  his  time  or  his  thoughts. 
Having  early  imbibed  a  taste  for  scientific  investigation, 
he  continued  to  interest  himself  in  questions  that  afforded 
him  occupation  and  solace,  even  when  his  fortunes  were  at 
the  lowest  ebb. 

"  Eesuming  the  rustic  habits  of  his  boyhood,"  says  his 
biographer,  "  he  made  his  journeys  on  foot,  with  a  little 
cheese  as  all  his  sustenance.  No  path  seemed  impracticable 
to  him,  no  rock  inaccessible.  He  never  sought  the  country 
mansions,  he  did  not  even  halt  at  the  inns.  To  pass  the 
night  on  the  hard  ground  in  some  herdsman's  hut,  was  to 
him  only  an  amusement.  He  would  talk  with  quarrymen 
and  miners,  with  blacksmiths  and  masons,  more  readily 
than  with  men  of  science.  It  was  thus  that  he  gained 
that  detailed  personal  acquaintance  with  the  surface  of 
France  with  which  he  enriched  his  writings." 

During  these  journeyings,  he  was  led  into  Auvergne  in 
the  year  1763,  where,  eleven  years  after  Guettard's  de- 
scription had  been  presented  to  the  Academy,  he  found 
himself  in  the  same  tract  of  Central  France,  wandering 
over  the  same  lava-fields,  from  Volvic  to  the  heights  of 
Mont  Dore.  Among  the  many  puzzles  reported  by  the 
mineralogists  of  his  day,  none  seems  to  have  excited  his 
interest  more  than  that  presented  by  the  black  columnar 
stone  which  was  found  in  various  parts  of  Europe,  and 
for  which  Agricola,  writing  in  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  had  revived  Pliny's  old  name  of  "  basalt."  The 
wonderful  symmetry,  combined  with  the  infinite  variety 


ii  Desmarest' s  Interest  in  Basalt  53 

of  the  pillars,  the  vast  size  to  which  they  reached,  the 
colossal  cliffs  along  which  they  were  ranged  in  admirable 
regularity,  had  vividly  aroused  the  curiosity  of  those  who 
concerned  themselves  with  the  nature  and  origin  of 
minerals  and  rocks.  Desmarest  had  read  all  that  he  could 
find  about  this  mysterious  stone.  He  cast  longing  eyes 
towards  the  foreign  countries  where  it  was  developed. 
In  particular,  he  pictured  to  himself  the  marvels  of  the 
Giant's  Causeway  of  the  north  of  Ireland,  as  one  of  the 
most  remarkable  natural  monuments  of  the  world,  where 
Nature  had  traced  her  operations  with  a  bold  hand,  but 
had  left  the  explanation  of  them  still  concealed  from  mortal 
ken.  '  How  fain  would  he  have  directed  his  steps  to  that 
distant  shore.  Little  did  he  dream  that  the  solution  of 
the  problems  presented  by  basalt  was  not  to  be  sought  in 
Ireland,  but  in  the  heart  of  his  own  country,  and  that  it 
was  reserved  for  him  to  find. 

Before  referring  to  the  steps  in  Desmarest's  progress 
towards  the  discovery  of  the  origin  of  basalt,  let  me  briefly 
sketch  what  was  known  on  the  subject  at  the  time  when  he 
began  his  researches.  Agricola,  who,  as  I  have  just  said, 
revived  the  Latin  name  Basaltes  for  this  dark  prismatic 
rock,  mentioned  that  it  was  to  be  seen  in  different  parts  of 
Germany,  and  in  particular  that  it  formed  the  eminence  on 
which  the  old  castle  of  Stolpen  in  Saxony  had  been  built.1 
It  was  afterwards  found  to  be  abundantly  distributed,  not 
only  in  Saxony,  but  in  Silesia,  in  Cassel,  and  in  the  valley 
of  the  Ehine  above  Cologne.28  In  these  places  it  usually 

1  De  Natura  Fossilium,  lib.  vii.  p.  315.     Folio,  Basel,  1546. 

2  Various  authors  who  had  noticed  the  occurrence  of  basalt  before  the 
publication  of  his  memoir  are  cited  by  Desmarest.     Him.  Acad.  Roy. 
Sciences,  vol.  for  1774,  p.  726  et  seq. 


54  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

formed  detached  eminences,  frequently  capping  hills,  and 
presenting  its  columns  in  vertical  rows  along  its  edges. 
There  was  nothing  about  it  likely  in  those  days  to  suggest 
a  volcanic  origin.  The  exposures  of  it  usually  belonged 
to  a  far  older  geological  period  than  the  comparatively 
recent  lava-streams  of  Auvergne,  and  in  the  course  of  time 
the  cones  and  craters  and  scoriae,  that  no  doubt  originally 
marked  these  sites,  had  gradually  disappeared. 

The  Giant's  Causeway,  too,  though  it  displayed  on  a 
far  more  colossal  scale  the  characteristic  structure  and 
scenery  of  basalt,  was  equally  silent  in  regard  to  its  origin. 
The  marvels  of  this  part  of  the  coast  of  Ireland  had  fre- 
quently been  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  learned,  from  the 
latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century  onward.1  But  here 
as  elsewhere,  it  was  rather  the  symmetrical  structure  than 
the  mode  of  formation  that  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
older  observers.  Even  as  far  back  as  the  year  1756,  one 
of  these  writers  pointed  out  the  remarkable  resemblance 
of  certain  rocks  in  Nassau  and  in  the  district  of  Treves 
and  Cologne  to  the  Giant's  Causeway,  which  by  that  time 
had  become  famous.2 

The  western  islands  of  Scotland,  which  far  surpass  the 
Irish  coast  in  the  extent  and  magnificence  of  their  basalt 
cliffs,  were  still  unknown  to  the  scientific  world.  The 
first  report  about  their  wonders  seems  to  have  reached 
London  in.the  spring  of  1761,  when  the  Bishop  of  Ossory 

1  See  Sir  R.  B.,  Phil.  Trans.,  xvii.   (1693)  p.  708  ;  S.  Foley,  xviii. 
(1694)  p.  170,  with  a  map  and  bird's-eye  view.     T.  Molyneux,  Ibid.  p. 
181  and  xix.  (1698)  p.  209,  with  drawings  of  the  columns.     R.  Pocock, 
xlv.  (1748)  p.  124,  and  xlviii.  part  i.  (1754),  with  further  figures  illus- 
trating the  jointing  of  the  columns. 

2  A.  Trembly,  Phil.  Trans,  xlix.  (1756)  p.  581. 


ii  Early  Observations  on  Basalt  55 

sent  to  the  Koyal  Society  a  letter  he  had  received  from 
E.  Mendez  da  Costa  telling  him  that  "  in  Cana  Island  to 
the  southward  of  Skye  and  near  the  island  of  Bum  the 
rocks  rise  into  polygon  pillars  .  .  .  jointed  exactly  like 
those  of  the  Giant's  Causeway." 1  But  it  was  reserved  for 
Sir  Joseph  Banks  to  give  the  first  detailed  account  of  the 
cliffs  of  Staffa  and  Fingal's  Cave,  which  from  that  time 
shared  with  the  Giant's  Causeway  in  the  renown  that 
drew  a  yearly  increasing  number  of  travellers  to  these  dis- 
tant shores.2 

Much  had  thus  been  learnt  as  to  the  diffusion  of  basalt 
in  Europe,  and  many  excellent  drawings  had  been  pub- 
lished of  the  remarkable  prismatic  structure  of  this  rock. 
But  no  serious  attempt  seems  to  have  been  made  to 
grapple  with  the  problem  of  its  origin.  Some  absurd 
notions  had  indeed  been  entertained  on  this  subject.  The 
long  regular  pillars  of  basalt,  it  was  gravely  suggested,  were 
jointed  bamboos  of  a  former  period,  which  had  somehow 
been  converted  into  stone.  The  similarity  of  the  prisms 
to  those  of  certain  minerals  led  some  mineralogists  to  regard 
basalt  as  a  kind  of  schorl,  which  had  taken  its  geometrical 
forms  in  the  process  of  crystallization.  Eome  de  Lisle  is 
even  said  to  have  maintained  that  each  basalt  prism  ought 
to  have  a  pyramidal  termination,  like  the  schorls  and  other 
small  crystals  of  the  same  nature.3 

Guettard,  as  we  have  seen,  drew  a  distinction  between 

1  Phil,  Trans.  Hi.  (1761)  p.  163. 

2  See  Pennant's  Tour  in  Scotland,  1772,  where  Banks's  narrative  is  in- 
serted with  a  number  of  excellent  engravings  of  the  more  remarkable  features 
in  Staffa. 

3  In  the  second  edition  of  his  Crystallographie  (1783)  he  clearly  dis- 
tinguishes between  crystallization  and  basaltic  structure.     The  latter  he 
regards  as  due  to  desiccation  or  cooling,  tome  i.  p.  439. 


56  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

basalt  and  lava,  and  this  opinion  was  general  in  his  time. 
The  basalts  of  Central  and  Western  Europe  were  usually 
found  on  hill  tops,  and  displayed  no  cones  or  craters,  or 
other  familiar  sign  of  volcanic  action.  On  the  contrary, 
they  were  not  infrequently  found  to  lie  upon,  and  even  to 
alternate  with,  undoubted  sedimentary  strata.  They  were, 
therefore,  not  unnaturally  grouped  with  these  strata,  and 
the  whole  association  of  rocks  was  looked  upon  as  having 
had  one  common  aqueous  origin.  It  was  also  a  prevalent 
idea  that  a  rock  which  had  been  molten  must  retain  obvious 
traces  of  that  condition  in  a  glassy  structure.  There  was 
no  such  conspicuous  vitreous  element  in  basalt,  so  that  this 
rock,  it  was  assumed,  could  never  have  been  volcanic.1  As 
Desmarest  afterwards  contended,  those  who  made  such 
objections  could  have  but  little  knowledge  of  volcanic 
products. 

We  may  now  proceed  to  trace  how  the  patient  and 
sagacious  inspector  of  French  industries  made  his  memor- 
able contribution  to  geological  theory.  It  was  while  travers- 
ing a  part  of  Auvergne  in  the  year  1*763  that  he  detected 
for  the  first  time  columnar  rocks  in  association  with  the 
remains  of  former  volcanoes.  On  the  way  from  Clerrnont 
to  the  Puy  de  Dome,  climbing  the  steep  slope  that  leads 
up  to  the  plateau  of  Prudelle,  with  its  isolated  outlier  of  a 
lava-stream  that  flowed  long  before  the  valley  below  it 
had  been  excavated,  he  came  upon  some  loose  columns  of 
a  dark  compact  stone  which  had  fallen  from  the  edge  of 
the  overlying  sheet  of  lava.  He  found  similar  columns 
standing  vertically  all  along  the  mural  front  of  the  lava, 

1  See  for  instance  Wallerius'  Mineralogia  (1773)  i.  p.  336,  replied  to 
by  Desmarest,  Attm.  Acad.  Roy.  Sciences  (1774),  p.  753. 


ii  Desmarest '  s  Discovery  in  Auvergne         57 

and  observed  that  they  were  planted  on  a  bed  of  scoriae 
and  burnt  soil,  beneath  which  lay  the  old  granite  that 
forms  the  foundation  rock  of  the  region.  He  noticed  still 
more  perfect  prisms  a  little  further  on,  belonging  to  the 
same  thin  cake  of  dark  stone  that  covered  the  plain  which 
leads  up  to  the  foot  of  the  great  central  puy. 

Every  year  geological  pilgrims  now  make  their  way  to 
Auvergne,  and  wander  over  its  marvellous  display  of  cones, 
craters  and  lava-rivers.  Each  one  of  them  climbs  to  the 
plateau  of  Prudelle,  and  from  its  level  surface  gazes  in 
admiration  across  the  vast  fertile  plain  of  the  Limagne  on 
the  one  side,  and  up  to  the  chain  of  the  puys  on  the  other. 
Yet  how  few  of  them  connect  that  scene  with  one  of  the 
great  triumphs  of  their  science,  or  know  that  it  was  there 
that  Desmarest  began  the  observations  that  directly  led  to 
the  fierce  contest  over  the  origin  of  basalt. 

That  cautious  observer  tells  us  that  amidst  the  infinite 
variety  of  objects  around  him,  he  drew  no  inference  from 
this  first  occurrence  of  columns,  but  that  his  attention  was 
aroused.  He  was  kept  no  long  time  in  suspense  on  the 
subject.  "  On  the  way  back  from  the  Puy  de  Dome,"  he 
tells  us,  "I  followed  the  thin  sheet  of  black  stone  and 
recognised  in  it  the  characters  of  a  compact  lava.  Con- 
sidering further  the  thinness  of  this  crust  of  rock,  with  its 
underlying  bed  of  scoriae,  and  the  way  in  which  it  extended 
from  the  base  of  hills  that  were  obviously  once  volcanoes, 
and  spread  out  over  the  granite,  I  saw  in  it  a  true  lava- 
stream  which  had  issued  from  one  of  the  neighbouring 
volcanoes.  With  this  idea  in  my  mind,  I  traced  out  the 
limits  of  the  lava,  and  found  again  everywhere  in  its  thick- 
ness the  faces  and  angles  of  the  columns,  and  on  the  top 


58  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

their  cross-section,  quite  distinct  from  each  other.  I  was 
thus  led  to  believe  that  prismatic  basalt  belonged  to  the 
class  of  volcanic  products,  and  that  its  constant  and 
regular  form  was  the  result  of  its  ancient  state  of  fusion. 
I  only  thought  then  of  multiplying  my  observations,  with 
the  view  of  establishing  the  true  nature  of  the  phenomenon 
and  its  conformity  with  what  is  to  be  found  in  Antrim 
— a  conformity  which  would  involve  other  points  of 
resemblance." 

He  narrates  the  course  of  his  discoveries  as  he  journeyed 
into  the  Mont  Dore,  detecting  in  many  places  fresh  con- 
firmation of  the  conclusion  he  had  formed.  But  not  only 
did  he  convince  himself  that  the  prismatic  basalts  of 
Auvergne  were  old  lava-streams,  he  carried  his  induction 
much  further  and  felt  assured  that  the  Irish  basalts  must 
also  have  had  a  volcanic  origin.  "  I  could  not  doubt,"  he 
says,  "  after  these  varied  and  repeated  observations  that 
the  groups  of  prismatic  columns  in  Auvergne  belonged  to 
the  same  conformation  as  those  of  Antrim,  and  that  the 
constant  and  regular  form  of  the  columns  must  have 
resulted  from  the  same  cause  in  both  regions.  What  con- 
vinced me  of  the  truth  of  this  opinion  was  the  examination 
of  the  material  constituting  the  Auvergne  columns  with 
that  from  the  Giant's  Causeway,  which  I  found  to  agree  in 
texture,  colour  and  hardness,  and  further,  the  sight  of  two 
engravings  of  the  Irish  locality  which  at  once  recalled  the 
scenery  of  parts  of  Mont  Dore.  I  draw  from  this  recog- 
nized resemblance  and  the  facts  that  establish  it  a  deduc- 
tion which  appears  to  be  justified  by  the  strength  of  the 
analogy — namely,  that  in  the  Giant's  Causeway,  and  in  all 
the  prismatic  masses  which  present  themselves  along  the 


ii  Desmarests  Observations  on  Basalt         59 

cliffs  of  the  Irish  coast,  in  short  even  among  the  truncated 
summits  of  the  interior,  we  see  the  operations  of  one  or 
more  volcanoes  which  are  extinct,  like  those  of  Auvergne. 
Further,  I  am  fully  persuaded  that  in  general  these  groups 
of  polygonal  columns  are  an  infallible  proof  of  an  old 
volcano,  wherever  the  stone  composing  them  has  a  com- 
pact texture,  spangled  with  brilliant  points,  and  a  black  or 
grey  tint." 

Here,  then,  was  a  bold  advance  in  theoretical  as  well 
as  observational  geology.  Not  only  was  the  discovery  of 
Guettard  confirmed,  that  there  had  once  been  active  vol- 
canoes in  the  heart  of  France,  but  materials  were  obtained 
for  explaining  the  origin  of  certain  enigmatical  rocks  which, 
though  they  had  been  found  over  a  large  part  of  Europe, 
had  hitherto  remained  a  puzzle  to  mineralogists.  This 
explanation,  if  it  were  confirmed,  would  show  how  widely 
volcanic  action  prevailed  over  countries  wherein  no  sign 
of  an  eruption  has  been  witnessed  since  the  earliest  ages 
of  human  history. 

Desmarest  was  in  no  hurry  to  publish  his  discovery. 
Unlike  some  modern  geologists,  who  rush  in  hot  haste 
into  print,  and  overload  the  literature  of  the  science  with 
narratives  of  rapid  and  imperfect  observations,  he  kept  his 
material  beside  him,  revolving  the  subject  in  his  mind, 
and  seeking  all  the  information  that  he  could  bring  to  bear 
upon  it.  He  tells  us  that  in  the  year  following  his  journey 
in  Auvergne,  he  spent  the  winter  in  Paris,  and  while  there, 
laid  before  the  Intendant  of  Auvergne  the  desirability  of 
having  the  volcanic  region  mapped.  His  proposition  was 
accepted,  and  Pasumot,  one  of  the  state  surveyors,  was 
entrusted  with  the  task  of  making  a  topographical  map  of 


6o  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  region  from  Volvic  to  beyond  Mont  Dore.  The  whole 
of  the  summer  of  1764  was  taken  up  with  this  work. 
Desmarest  accompanied  the  geographer,  who  himself  had 
a  large  acquaintance  with  the  mineralogy  of  his  day.  The 
result  was  the  production  of  a  map  which  far  surpassed 
anything  of  the  kind  that  had  before  been  attempted,  in 
the  accuracy,  variety,  and  clearness  of  its  delineations  of 
volcanic  phenomena. 

At  last,  in  the  summer  of  1765,  after  two  years  of 
reflection,  he  communicated  to  the  Academy  of  Sciences 
at  Paris  •  the  results  at  which  he  had  arrived.  But  even 
then  he  showed  his  earnest  desire  for  the  utmost  accuracy 
and  fulness  attainable.  He  kept  back  his  paper  from 
publication.  Next  year  he  returned  to  Auvergne,  after  a 
prolonged  journey  through  the  volcanic  regions  of  Italy, 
from  the  Vicentin  and  Padua  southwards  to  Naples  and 
Vesuvius.  In  1769  he  once  more  revisited  the  volcanoes 
of  Central  France,  extending  his  excursions  into  the 
Cantal.  In  the  early  part  of  the  summer  of  1771  he 
again  brought  before  the  Academy  the  results  of  his 
researches  on  the  origin  and  nature  of  basalt,  embodying 
in  his  Memoir  the  mass  of  material  which  his  extended 
travel  and  mature  reflection  had  enabled  him  to  bring 
together.  But  it  was  not  until  three  years  later,  viz.,  in 
1774,  that  his  long-delayed  essay  at  last  appeared  in  the 
annual  volume  of  the  Memoirs  of  the  Academy.  Life  was 
more  placid  in  those  days  than  it  has  since  become.  The 
feverish  haste  to  be  famous,  and  the  frantic  struggle  for 
priority,  which  are  now  unhappily  so  rampant,  were  but 
little  known  in  Desmarest's  days.  He  kept  his  work 
eleven  years  beside  him,  enriching  it  continually  with 


ii  Desmaresfs  published  Memoirs  6 1 

fresh  observations  drawn  from  extended  journeys,  and  thus 
making  his  conclusions  rest  on  an  ever-widening  basis  of 
accurately  determined  fact. 

The  Memoir,  as  finally  published,  was  divided  into 
three  parts,  two  of  which  appeared  together,  the  third  not 
until  three  years  later.  In  the  first  part,  the  author 
narrated  his  observations  in  Auvergne  and  other  districts, 
bearing  on  the  nature  of  basalt.  Time  would  fail  us  were 
we  to  try  to  follow  him  in  his  survey  of  the  regions 
where  he  found  the  evidence  which  he  brought  forward. 
Let  me  refer  merely  to  the  concluding  pages,  in  which  he 
states  his  opinion  as  to  the  origin  of  the  columnar  rock 
which  he  had  tracked  with  such  diligence  from  district  to 
district.  His  account,  he  remarks,  would  be  incomplete 
if  he  did  not  indicate  at  the  same  time  the  materials 
which  have  been  melted  by  the  fire  in  order  to  produce 
basalt.  He  had  collected  a  series  of  specimens  of  granite 
which  he  believed  to  represent  these  materials.  They 
had  undergone  different  degrees  of  alteration,  some  showing 
still  their  fusible  spar,  quartz  or  other  minerals,  while 
others  had  partly  undergone  complete  fusion.  He  had 
convinced  himself  that  various  other  volcanic  rocks  besides 
basalt  had  resulted  from  the  fusion  of  granite,  the  base  of 
which  may  have  been  completely  melted,  while  the  quartz 
of  the  original  rock  remained  unchanged.  He  was  not 
aware  that  the  difference  of  chemical  composition  demon- 
strates that  the  melting  of  granite  could  never  have  pro- 
duced basalt. 

These  ideas,  which  we  now  know  to  be  erroneous,  might 
readily  occur  to  the  early  observers.  It  is  undoubtedly 
true  that  pieces  of  more  or  less  completely  melted  granite 


62  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

are  to  be  found  among  the  ejections  of  old  volcanoes,  and 
the  inference  would  naturally  suggest  itself  that  the  fires 
kindled  by  the  combustion  of  carbonaceous  substances 
underneath  a  volcano  might  fuse  the  surrounding  and 
overlying  rocks,  and  expel  streams  of  molten  material. 
We  shall  find  that  Werner  adopted  this  view,  and  that 
through  him  it  became  predominant  over  Europe  even 
after  more  enlightened  conceptions  of  the  subject  had 
been  announced. 

Desmarest  does  not  seem  to  have  had  at  this  time,  if 
ever,  any  very  definite  conception  of  the  origin  of  the 
high  temperature  within  volcanic  reservoirs.  Nor  had 
chemistry  yet  afforded  much  assistance  in  ascertaining  the 
resemblances  and  differences  among  rocks  and  minerals. 
His  mistakes  were  thus  a  faithful  reflex  of  the  limited 
knowledge  of  the  period  in  which  he  wrote. 

In  the  second  part  of  his  Memoir,  Desmarest  gives  a 
historical  narrative  of  all  that  had  been  written  before 
his  time  on  the  subject  of  basalt.  The  most  interesting 
and  important  passages  in  this  retrospect  are  the  comments 
of  the  author  on  the  writings  he  summarises,  and  the 
additions  which  he  is  thereby  enabled  to  make  to  the 
observations  already  given  by  him.  He  confesses  that, 
had  he  begun  his  investigations  among  such  isolated 
patches  of  basalt  as  those  capping  the  hills  in  Cassel  and 
Saxony,  he  would  never  have  been  able  to  affirm  that 
basalt  is  only  a  lava.  But  he  had  encountered  such 
perfect  demonstration  of  the  volcanic  nature  of  the  rock, 
tracing  it  with  its  fresh  scoriae  up  to  the  very  craters 
whence  it  flowed,  that  he  could  not  allow  this  clear 
evidence  to  be  invalidated,  or  even  weakened,  by  cases 


ii  Desmaresfs  Physiography  63 

where  the  volcanic  origin  had  been  more  or  less  ob- 
scured. 

It  is  at  this  point  in  his  investigation  that  the  genius 
of  Desmarest  shines  with  a  brilliance  far  above  that  of 
any  of  his  contemporaries  who  concerned  themselves  with 
geological  problems.  Guettard  had  clearly  indicated  the 
volcanic  origin  of  the  puys  of  Auvergne,  and  no  great 
acumen  was  needed  to  follow  up  the  clue  which  he  had 
thus  given.  But  to  trace  a  pathway  through  the  maze  of 
lavas  of  many  different  ages,  to  unite  and  connect  them 
all  in  one  method  of  interpretation,  and  thus  to  remove 
the  endless  difficulties  and  harmonise  the  many  apparent 
contradictions  which  beset  the  investigation,  was  a  task 
which  called  forth  the  highest  powers  of  observation  and 
induction.  Among  the  many  claims  of  France  to  the 
respect  and  gratitude  of  all  students  of  geology,  there 
is  assuredly  none  that  ought  to  be  more  frankly 
recognized  than  that,  in  her  wide  and  fair  domain, 
she  possessed  a  region  where  the  phenomena  were  dis- 
played in  unrivalled  perfection,  and  that  in  Desmarest 
she  could  boast  a  son  gifted  with  the  skill,  patience, 
imagination,  and  originality  that  qualified  him  so  admir- 
ably for  the  laborious  task  which  he  undertook.  His 
achievements  form  one  of  the  most  notable  landmarks  in 
the  early  history  of  geology. 

Desmarest,  wandering  over  the  volcanic  districts  of 
Central  France,  had  been  profoundly  impressed,  as  every 
traveller  must  be,  by  the  extraordinary  varieties  in  the 
condition  of  the  various  lava-currents.  Some  of  these 
sheets  of  rock  retain  still  the  dark,  verdureless,  rugged 
surfaces  which  they  assumed  ages  ago  when  their  molten 


64  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

floods  stiffened  into  stone.  Others  have  lost  their  cover- 
ing of  scoriae,  and  are  seen  clinging  to  the  sides  of  valleys, 
in  positions  which  seem  impossible  for  any  lava-current 
to  have  taken.  Others  are  perched  in  solitary  outlying 
sheets  on  the  tops  of  plateaux,  with  no  cone  near  them, 
nor  any  obvious  source  from  which  they  could  have  flowed. 

Pondering  on  these  apparently  contradictory  pheno- 
mena, Desmarest,  with  the  inspiration  of  true  genius, 
seized  on  the  fruitful  principle  that  would  alone  explain 
them.  He  saw  that  the  varying  conditions  of  the  several 
lavas  were  due  to  the  ceaseless  influence  of  atmospheric 
denudation.  He  convinced  himself  that  the  detached 
outliers  of  basalt,  capping  the  ridges  and  plateaux,  are 
really  remnants  of  once  continuous  sheets  of  lava,  and 
that  their  isolation,  together  with  the  removal  of  their 
original  covering  of  scoriae  and  slags,  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  operations  of  rain  and  melted  snow.  The  depth  of 
the  valleys  cut  through  these  lava-platforms  was  found  by 
him  to  be  commensurate  with  the  antiquity  of  the  lavas, 
and  with  the  size  of  the  streams  that  flowed  between  the 
severed  escarpments. 

He  ascertained  that,  in  proportion  to  their  antiquity,  the 
lava-streams  had  lost,  one  after  another,  the  usual  outward 
features  of  the  younger  sheets.  The  superficial  scoriae  had 
disappeared,  and  the  craters  were  worn  away,  until  only 
scattered  outliers  of  compact  dark  rock  remained.  Yet  be- 
tween this  extreme  and  that  of  the  most  recent  eruptions, 
where  the  lavas,  in  unbroken,  rugged,  cavernous  sheets, 
extend  from  their  craters  down  into  the  present  valleys, 
where  they  have  driven  aside  the  running  streams,  every 
intermediate  stage  could  be  found. 


ii  Desmarest  on  the  Origin  of  Valleys         65 

Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  origin  of  valleys  by  the 
erosive  action  of  the  streams  which  flow  in  them,  though 
it  has  been  credited  to  various  writers,1  was  first  clearly 
taught  from  actual  concrete  examples  by  Desmarest.  The 
first  attempt  to  trace  back  the  history  of  a  landscape,  to 
show  its  successive  phases,  and  to  connect  them  all  with 
the  continuous  operation  of  the  same  causes  which  are  still 
producing  like  effects,  was  made  by  this  illustrious  native 
of  France. 

So  satisfied  was  Desmarest  with  the  proofs  furnished 
by  Auvergne  regarding  the  volcanic  origin  of  basalt,  that 
he  coined  the  term  "  basalt-lava,"  with  an  apology  to  the 
mineralogists,  and  remarked  that  when  once  the  characters 
of  this  rock  have  been  appreciated,  it  may  be  recognized 
everywhere,  in  spite  of  the  most  stupendous  degradation. 
Casting  his  eye  over  the  map  of  Europe,  and  noting  the 
localities  from  which  the  occurrence  of  basalt  had  been 
reported,  he  saw  two  great  regions  of  ancient  volcanic 
activity  in  the  heart  of  the  continent.  One  of  these  lay  to 
the  east,  along  the  confines  of  Saxony  and  Bohemia  into 
Silesia,  from  Freiberg  to  Lignitz  ;  the  other  stretched  from 
theEhine  above  Cologne,  through  Nassau,  Hesse-Darmstadt, 
and  Cassel. 

The  map  which  has  been  already  referred  to  as  accom- 
panying this  remarkable  memoir,  depicts  with  great  clear- 
ness the  grouping  of  the  volcanoes  over  a  large  part  of 
Auvergne.  It  represents  them  by  distinct  kinds  of 
engraving,  so  as  to  show  four  classes  differing  from  each 

1  Thus  by  Lyell  and  Murchison  it  was  ascribed  to  Saussure,  Playfair, 
and  Montlosier,  Edin.  New  Phil.  Journ.  vol.  vii.  (1829),  p.  15.  In  Eng- 
land it  has  been  more  commonly  assigned  to  Button  and  Playfair,  and  to 
Scrope. 

F 


66  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

other  in  age  and  other  characters.  The  first  of  these 
classes  includes  the  younger  lava  -  streams,  not  yet  cut 
through  by  running  water,  and  still  connected  with  their 
parent  cones.  The  second  embraces  those  lavas  which  bear 
decomposed  earthy  materials  on  their  surface,  and  from 
which  their  original  craters  have  disappeared.  In  the 
third  class  are  ranged  those  lavas  which  have  been  reduced 
to  detached  outliers  separated  by  valleys;  while  in  the 
fourth,  some  isolated  masses  are  placed  which  Desmarest 
thought  had  been  "melted  in  place,"  or  erupted  where 
they  now  appear. 

The  third  part  of  the  memoir,  though  read  with  the 
second  part  in  1*771,  was  not  published  until  1777.  In 
this  essay  the  author  discussed  the  basalt  of  the  ancients, 
and  the  natural  history  of  the  various  kinds  of  stones  to 
which  at  different  times  the  term  basalt  had  been  applied. 

It  is  interesting  to  follow  the  slow  elaboration  of  his 
views  through  his  successive  memoirs.  We  must  remember 
that,  during  these  busy  years,  his  time  and  thoughts  were 
chiefly  taken  up  with  the  inquiries  into  industrial  develop- 
ment which  the  Government  of  the  day  had  entrusted 
to  him,  and  which  necessitated  frequent  and  prolonged 
journeys,  not  only  in  France,  but  in  other  countries  of 
Europe.  He  felt  that  the  great  questions  in  physical 
geography  which  specially  occupied  his  attention  could 
best  be  studied  in  Auvergne.  He  returned  to  that  region 
at  every  available  opportunity,  revisiting  again  and  again 
localities  already  familiar  to  him,  and  testing  his  deduc- 
tions by  fresh  appeals  to  nature.  Tour  years  after  his 
great  monograph  on  the  origin  of  basalt  had  been  read  to 
the  Academy  of  Sciences,  he  presented  another  essay, 


ii  Desmareit  on  Volcanic  History  67 

developing  still  further  the  ideas  of  denudation  and  suc- 
cessive eruptive  periods  which  had  been  briefly  sketched 
in  his  first  communication.  The  scope  of  this  new  effort 
may  be  judged  of  from  its  full  title  :  "  On  the  Determina- 
tion of  Three  Epochs  of  Nature  from  the  Products  of 
Volcanoes,  and  on  the  Use  that  may  be  made  of  these 
Epochs  in  the  Study  of  Volcanoes."  This  essay  was  laid 
before  the  Academy  in  the  year  1775.  An  extract  from  it 
appeared  after  the  lapse  of  four  years,1  but  the  full  paper 
was  not  published  until  the  year  1806  2 — no  less  than 
thirty-one  years  after  its  original  preparation.  During  this 
long  interval  the  controversy  about  the  origin  of  basalt 
had  extended  over  most  of  the  countries  of  Europe,  and 
had  involved  the  very  subjects  of  which  Desmarest  treated. 
He  himself,  keenly  as  the  matters  in  dispute  interested 
him,  took  no  part  in  the  warfare.  In  his  memoir  he  ignores 
the  combatants  and  their  strife,  but  quietly  repeats  and 
strengthens  statements  which  he  had  published  a  genera- 
tion before,  and  which,  had  they  been  properly  considered 
and  verified,  would  have  prevented  any  controversy  from 
ever  arising.  I  shall  have  more  to  say  about  this  dispute 
in  my  next  lecture.  In  the  meantime  let  us  consider  the 
character  of  Desmarest's  long-delayed  contribution  to  the 
literature  and  theory  of  geology. 

The  progress  of  his  investigations  had  led  him  to 
perceive  the  necessity  of  correlating  the  various  pheno- 
mena connected  with  ancient  volcanoes,  and  especially 
with  reference  to  the  questions  of  their  relative  age  and 
of  the  alterations  they  have  undergone  from  exposure  to 

1  Journal  de  Physique,  tome  xiii.  (1779),  p.  115. 

2  Mtm.  de  VInstit.  des  Sciences  Math,  et  Phys.  tome  vi.  (1806),  p.  219. 
It  was  read  again  on  1st  Prairial,  An  XII  (20th  May  1804). 

TIKI 


68  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  elements.  The  facts  known  to  him  suggested  an 
arrangement  of  them  into  three  groups  or  epochs,  which 
were  not  meant  to  imply  definite  periods  of  time  or  pre- 
cise dates,  but  would  express  the  idea  of  a  recognizable 
succession  of  events.  His  researches  had  assured  him 
that  the  volcanic  history  of  Auvergne  "  formed  a  whole, 
which,  though  incomplete,  showed  that  Nature  had  fol- 
lowed the  same  order  of  procedure  in  the  most  remote 
a<*es  as  in  the  most  recent  times." 

o 

In  co-ordinating  the  appearances  presented  by  the 
different  volcanic  masses,  he  began  with  the  consideration 
of  what  were  obviously  the  youngest,  on  the  principle  that 
the  last  operations  of  Nature  are  simpler,  and  have  under- 
gone less  modification  from  the  influences  which  are  con- 
tinually changing  the  face  of  the  land.  He  perceived  that 
volcanoes  are  only  temporary  accidents  in  the  midst  of  the 
ordinary  and  normal  operations  of  nature,  that  the  materials 
erupted  by  volcanoes,  at  various  intervals  from  a  remote 
antiquity,  must  have  suffered  from  the  universal  degradation, 
and  that  the  extent  of  their  waste  would  be  proportionate 
to  the  length  of  time  during  which  the  loss  had  been 
continued.  The  latest  lavas  must  unquestionably  present 
most  nearly  the  primitive  forms  of  volcanic  masses,  and 
should  thus  serve  as  a  standard  for  comparison,  to  be  kept 
before  the  eyes  of  every  observer  who  would  judge  correctly 
of  the  extent  and  progress  of  the  alteration  that  is  to  be 
seen  in  other  regions. 

The  first  of  his  three  periods  includes  the  products  of 
still  active  and  recently  extinct  volcanoes.  These  are 
distinguished  by  the  association  of  crater-bearing  cones  of 
cinders  and  scoriae,  with  streams  of  rugged  lava,  which  can 


ii  Desmarest  on  Volcanic  History  69 

be  followed  from  the  cones  into  the  surrounding  country 
over  which  they  have  flowed.  The  most  modern  lava- 
streams  are  not  cut  through  by  valleys,  but  form  continuous 
sheets.  Yet  within  the  limits  of  this  first  epoch  proofs  of 
alteration  manifest  themselves.  The  loose  scoriae  and 
cinders  are  washed  down  to  lower  levels,  the  cones  are 
attacked  and  the  lavas  begin  to  be  trenched.  As  these 
changes  advance,  the  flow  of  running  water  gradually  cuts 
through  the  sheets  of  lava  and  forms  valleys  across  them. 
The  epoch  embraced  all  the  ages  required  for  this  erosion, 
and  during  its  continuance  repeated  outflows  of  lava  took 
place.  Each  of  these  currents  of  melted  rock  would  seek 
the  lowest  levels,  and  would  thus  mark  the  valley-bottom 
of  its  time,  in  the  long  process  of  excavation. 

In  the  records  of  the  second  epoch,  the  scoriae  and  ashes 
have  been  swept  away,  the  cones  have  entirely  disap- 
peared, and  the  streams  of  lava  have  been  cut  into  separate 
patches  by  the  erosion  of  the  valleys,  above  which  they  are 
now  left  perched  as  high  plains  or  plateaux.  Notwith- 
standing the  stupendous  results  thus  achieved,  Desmarest 
seeks  no  vast  terrestrial  disturbance  to  account  for  them. 
He  finds  their  explanation  in  the  working  of  the  very 
same  meteoric  agents  which  are  still  carrying  on  the  same 
process  of  degradation.  The  cellular  parts  of  the  lavas, 
under  the  influence  of  the  weather,  crumble  down  into 
mere  loose  earth,  which  is  easily  washed  away  by  rain  and 
melted  snow,  leaving  only  the  harder  and  more  resisting 
core  of  more  solid  rock.  In  like  manner,  the  loose  materials 
of  the  cones  are  removed,  until  perhaps  only  masses 
of  lava  remain  behind  that  may  have  solidified  at  their 
bottoms.  By  this  series  of  operations  an  entire  trans- 


70  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

formation  is  wrought  on  the  face  of  the  country.  Lavas 
which  originally  covered  the  floors  of  valleys,  as  the 
ground  around  them  is  lowered,  are  at  last  turned  into 
high  tablelands,  and  are  still  further  cut  through  and 
separated  into  detached  portions,  according  to  the  multipli- 
cation and  deepening  of  the  ravines  and  valleys  by  which 
they  are  traversed.  To  realize  the  ancient  continuity  of 
these  venerable  lava-sheets,  we  must  in  imagination  fill  up 
the  valleys,  and  thus  restore  the  plain  over  which  the 
molten  rock  originally  flowed. 

As  all  the  scoriae  and  craters  are  gone,  the  only  way  of 
detecting  an  eruptive  centre  in  the  volcanic  products  of 
this  epoch  is  to  find  the  point  of  common  origin  for  several 
streams,  such  points  being  often  marked  by  large  isolated 
patches  of  lava  (culots). 

Desmarest  arrives  at  the  important  conclusion  that  the 
lavas  of  his  second  epoch  were  erupted  before  the  excava- 
tion of  the  present  valleys  out  of  the  original  plain  over 
which  the  streams  of  basalt  were  poured.  The  volcanic 
events  of  which  they  are  the  memorials  must  thus  go  back 
to  a  remote  antiquity,  for  the  erosion  of  valleys  is  obviously 
an  exceedingly  slow  process.  But  these  lavas  are  evidently 
much  younger  than  the  horizontal  sedimentary  strata  and 
the  granite  which  they  overlie,  both  of  which  are  also 
trenched  by  the  valleys. 

The  third  and  most  ancient  epoch  is  denoted  by  a  series 
of  lavas,  which,  instead  of  overlying  the  sedimentary  strata, 
underlie  them  or  are  interstratified  with  them.  These 
sediments  are  now  recognized  as  the  deposits  of  one  of  the 
old  Tertiary  lakes  of  Europe.  Their  layers  are  full  of  land- 
plants,  land  and  fresh-water  shells,  and  remains  of  terres- 


ii  Desmarest  on  Volcanic  History  71 

trial  mammals.  But  to  Desmarest  they  were  proofs  of  the 
former  presence  of  the  sea  over  the  heart  of  France.  He 
inferred  that  the  pebbles  of  various  lavas  which  he  found 
among  these  strata  denoted  former  volcanic  eruptions, 
before  the  accumulation  of  the  marine  deposits.  But  he 
noticed  also  indications  of  the  discharge  of  lava  during  the 
sojourn  of  the  sea  over  this  region.  He  believed  that  his 
third  epoch  must  have  lasted  some  considerable  time,  so  as 
to  permit  the  deposition  of  600  or  900  feet  of  horizontal 
sediments  above  the  lowest  lavas.1 

He  remarks  that  from  ignorance  of  this  method  of 
following  the  sequence  of  eruptions  and  the  effects  of  con- 
tinuous waste,  naturalists  had  failed  to  detect  the  existence 
of  lavas  of  the  second  and  third  epochs  in  districts  where 
eruptions  of  the  first  epoch  were  no  longer  to  be  recog- 
nized. These  observers,  he  contended,  had  misread  the 
evidence  of  nature,  referring  what  were  undoubtedly 
volcanic  rocks  to  deposition  from  water,  to  schists,  and  to 
pierre  de  corne,  and  on  the  other  hand  mistaking  for 
volcanic  craters  what  were  only  hollows  dug  out  by  run- 
ning water  in  the  lavas  of  the  second,  or  even  of  the  first 
epoch. 

The  sagacity  of  these  generalizations  has  been  amply 
sustained  by  the  researches  of  later  times.  Alike  in 
volcanic  geology  and  in  the  doctrines  of  denudation,  the 
labours  of  Desmarest  marked  the  rise  of  a  new  era  in  the 


1  In  the  article  "  Auvergne  "  in  his  Geographic  Physique,  p.  882  (pub- 
lished in  1803),  he  briefly  summarises  his  three  epochs  thus — "  I  have 
distinguished  three  kinds  of  volcanoes  in  Auvergne,  first,  ancient  vol- 
canoes;  second,  modern  volcanoes;  and  third,  submarine  volcanoes." 
Probably  most  of  the  lavas  of  his  third  epoch  are  rather  of  the  nature  of 
intrusive  sills. 


72  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

investigation  of  the  past  history  of  the  earth.  They 
showed  how  patient  detailed  research  could  solve  some  of 
the  most  transcendently  interesting  problems  in  geology, 
and  how  the  minute  and  philosophical  investigation  of 
one  small  area  of  the  globe  could  furnish  principles  of 
universal  application. 

In  one  respect,  perhaps,  this  far-seeing  observer  seems 
to  have  been  almost  afraid  to  push  his  views  of  denuda- 
tion to  their  logical  conclusion.  There  occur  in  Central 
France  many  flat,  isolated  areas  of  basalt  capping  de- 
tached hills  and  fragments  of  plateaux,  not  apparently 
connected  with  any  visible  lava-current  or  centre  of  erup- 
tion. These  patches  were  called  by  him  culots,  and  he 
explained  their  origin  by  supposing  them  to  mark  the 
positions  of  volcanic  vents  up  which  the  melted  material 
had  risen  without  flowing  out,  and  where  it  had  solidified 
within  the  crater,  being  retained  by  the  encircling  wall  of 
scoriaB  and  cinders.  The  removal  of  the  surrounding  loose 
material  would,  he  thought,  leave  the  lava  as  a  cake  with 
steep  scarped  sides  crowning  the  slopes  below.  Possibly 
some  of  his  culots  originated  in  the  way  supposed,  but 
there  can  be  little  doubt  that  most  of  them  are  remnants 
of  lava-streams  reduced  to  almost  the  last  stage  by  the 
progress  of  denudation. 

From  the  long  intervals  which  he  allowed  to  elapse 
between  the  presentation  of  his  papers  to  the  Academy 
and  their  final  publication,  it  might  be  supposed  that 
Desmarest  was  probably  of  a  procrastinating,  possibly 
even  of  an  indolent,  temperament.  Yet,  when  we  consider 
the  amount  of  work,  official  and  scientific,  which  he 
accomplished,  we  must  acquit  him  of  such  an  imputation. 


ii  Desmaresfs  '  Geographic  Physique '          73 


His  voluminous  reports  on  the  various  industries  of  France 
show  how  actively  and  zealously  he  laboured  in  his 
official  harness.  But  perhaps  the  best  proof  of  his  inde- 
fatigable industry  was  his  colossal  Geographic  Physique, 
which  he  undertook  as  part  of  the  famous  Encydopddie 
Mtthodique  founded  by  Diderot  and  D'Alembert.  The 
exhaustive  treatment  of  his  subject  may  be  inferred  from 
the  fact  that  after  devoting  to  it  four  massive  quarto  volumes 
of  from  700  to  900  pages  each,  he  had  only  got  to  the 
letter  E"  when  death  closed  his  labours. 

The  first  volume  of  this  great  work  is  in  many  respects 
the  most  interesting.  The  author  in  his  preface  tells  how 
he  means  to  exclude  from  his  task  all  discussion  of 
theories  of  the  earth,  for,  as  he  frankly  confesses,  he  had 
long  looked  upon  these  theories  as  utterly  opposed  to  the 
principles  of  Physical  Geography.  But  on  second  thoughts, 
as  unfortunately  such  theories  really  existed,  having  much 
the  same  relation  to  Physical  Geography  that  fable  bears 
to  history,  he  had  resolved  to  give  a  summary  of  the 
subject,  thus  conforming  to  the  practice  of  some  writers 
who  begin  their  histories  with  a  brief  mention  of  the 
heroic  times.1  Accordingly  he  devotes  the  first  volume 
to  notices  of  the  more  important  authors  who  had  treated 
of  his  subject,  excluding  those  who  were  still  alive.  He 
made,  however,  exceptions  to  this  exclusion  in  favour  of 
Pallas  and  Hutton.  Though  he  undertook  to  present 
merely  an  impartial  summary  of  the  opinions  of  other 
writers,  it  is  instructive  to  have  these  summaries  from  the 
hand  of  a  man  like  Desmarest,  who  was  contemporary 
with  many  of  those  of  whom  he  discourses.  The  inter- 

1  Geographie  Physique,  vol.  i.  (1794),  preface. 


74  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

spersed  comment  and  criticism  in  his  notices  are  specially 
valuable. 

The  other  three  volumes  were  devoted  to  descriptions  of 
places,  districts,  and  countries,  and  to  articles  or  subjects 
in  Physical  Geography — a  branch  of  knowledge  which 
Desmarest  regarded  as  embracing  two  equally  important 
and  closely  related  subjects — the  interior  structure  of  the 
globe  and  its  external  form.  Geology  was  not  yet  admitted 
to  a  formal  place  among  the  sciences,  but  geological 
questions  occupy  a  prominent  place  in  the  massive  quartos 
of  the  Encydoptdie  Mdthodique.1 

The  delays  that  attended  the  publication  of  Desmarest's 
important  and  original  observations  and  deductions  respect- 
ing the  volcanic  geology  of  Auvergne  reached  their  climax 
in  the  case  of  his  detailed  map  of  that  region.  We  have 
seen  that  at  his  instigation  a  topographical  survey  of 
Auvergne  on  a  large  scale  was  begun  as  far  back  as  1764, 
and  that  reductions  of  this  map  accompanied  his  Memoirs 
presented  to  the  Academy  of  Sciences.  The  map  itself, 
however,  with  all  its  elaborate  detail,  bearing  on  the 
history  of  the  volcanoes  of  Central  France,  still  remained 
in  his  hands.  Year  after  year  he  sought  to  bring  it  nearer 
to  his  ideal  of  perfection.  Every  part  of  the  region  had 
been  scrupulously  examined  by  him,  every  puy  was  set 
down,  every  crater  was  carefully  drawn,  every  current  of 
lava  was  traced  out  from  its  source  to  its  termination, 

1  Vol.  i.  of  the  Gftographie  Physique  appeared  in  An  III  (1794) ;  vol.  ii. 
in  1803  ;  vol.  iii.  in  1809,  and  vol.  iv.  in  1811.  Among  the  geological 
articles  of  interest  in  these  volumes  reference  may  be  made  to  those  on 
Antrim,  Auvergne,  Basalte,  Chaussee  des  Geans,  and  Courans.  Vol.  v. ,  left 
unfinished  by  Desmarest,  was  continued  by  Bory  de  St.  Vincent,  Doin, 
Ferry,  and  Huot,  and  was  not  published  until  1828. 


ii  Desmaresfs  Map  of  Auvergne  75 

every  detached  area  of  basalt  was  faithfully  represented. 
By  a  system  of  hachures  and  signs  the  modern  and  ancient 
lavas  were  discriminated.  But  he  still  kept  the  work 
back,  and  when  he  died  it  remained  unpublished. 

Of  all  his  contributions  to  the  progress  of  geology,  this 
map  must  be  considered  the  most  memorable.  It  was  the 
compendium  of  all  his  toil  in  Auvergne,  and  showed,  as  in 
a  model,  the  structure  of  the  country  which  he  had  so 
patiently  and  successfully  elucidated.  The  reduced  map 
published  in  his  first  Memoir  and  the  portions  of  the  map 
issued  with  his  second  Memoir,  were  all  that  he  allowed 
to  appear  in  his  lifetime,  but  they  failed  to  impress  the 
minds  of  his  contemporaries,  as  the  entire  map  would 
have  done,  with  its  complete  and  clear  delineation  of  the 
whole  district.  Labouring  after  a  perfection  which  he 
could  not  attain,  he  not  only  lost  the  credit  which  the  map 
would  have  brought  him  in  his  lifetime,  but  he  retarded 
the  progress  of  the  sound  views  which  he  himself  held  and 
wished  to  see  prevail.  Had  this  truly  admirable  map  been 
published  by  him,  together  with  a  general  description  of  the 
volcanoes  depicted  on  it,  his  name  would  have  been  placed 
at  once  and  by  universal  assent  at  the  head  of  the  geologists 
of  his  day,  and  the  miserable  controversy  about  the  nature 
of  basalt  would  either  never  have  arisen,  or  could  have 
been  speedily  set  at  rest.  Cuvier  tells  us  that  Desmarest 
himself  was  fully  conscious  of  the  desirability  of  publishing 
the  map,  but  his  life  slipped  away  as  he  still  aimed  at 
further  improvement  of  it.  Yet  he  could  not  bear  that 
other  observers  should  enter  his  volcanic  region  and 
describe  its  features.  It  used  to  be  said  that  he  seemed 
to  look  on  Auvergne  as  his  own  property,  and  certainly 


76  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

he  was  the  legitimate  owner  of  most  of  the  observations 
made  there  after  him. 

Cuvier,  who  knew  him  well  and  who  had  watched 
with  interest  his  declining  years,  gives  us  a  vivid  picture 
of  Desmarest.  The  illustrious  geologist  was  little  fitted 
to  push  his  way  in  a  society  where  the  most  successful  art 
was  that  of  self-advertisement.  He  took  no  more  pains 
about  his  private  interest  than  he  did  about  his  rights  in 
regard  to  scientific  discovery,  importuning  neither  the 
dispensers  of  fortune  nor  those  of  fame.  With  his  crust 
and  his  cheese,  he  said,  he  needed  no  Government  help  to 
visit  the  manufactories  or  the  mountains.  In  short,  in 
studying  all  the  processes  of  art,  all  the  forces  of  nature, 
he  had  entirely  neglected  those  arts  that  sway  the  world, 
because  nothing  which  agitates  the  world  could  move  him. 
Even  works  of  wit  and  imagination  remained  unknown 
to  him,  because  they  did  not  lie  within  the  range  of  his 
studies.  His  friends  used  jocularly  to  affirm  that  he 
would  have  broken  the  most  beautiful  statue  in  order  to 
ascertain  the  nature  of  an  antique  stone,  and  this  character 
was  so  widely  given  to  him  that  at  Eome  the  keepers  of 
the  museums  felt  some  alarm  in  admitting  him.  In 
society,  too,  things,  whatever  they  might  be,  affected  him 
on  one  side  only.  For  instance,  when  an  Englishman  was 
recounting  at  the  house  of  the  Duchesse  d'Anville  the 
then  recent  thrilling  incident  in  Cook's  first  voyage,  when 
his  vessel,  pierced  by  a  point  of  rock,  was  only  saved  from 
sinking  by  the  stone  breaking  off  and  remaining  fixed  in 
the  hole,  every  one  present  expressed  in  his  own  way 
the  interest  he  felt  in  the  story.  Desmarest,  however, 
quietly  inquired  whether  the  rock  was  basaltic  or  calcareous. 


ii  Personal  Traits  of  Desmarest  77 

A  character  so  little  affected  by  external  things  was 
naturally  immovable  in  regard  to  relations  and  habits. 
From  the  earliest  days  when  he  began  to  be  known,  he  had 
been  engaged  to  pass  his  Sundays  at  Auteuil  with  a  friend. 
Ever  afterwards  he  would  appear  there  on  the  usual  day, 
even  when  his  friend  was  dead,  and  when  age  no  longer 
allowed  him  to  enjoy  the  country ;  and  as  he  had  from  the 
first  gone  on  foot,  he  always  went  there  on  foot  until  he 
was  eighty-five  years  old.  All  that  his  family  could  then 
prevail  upon  him  to  do  was  to  take  a  carriage. 

Nor  was  he  less  constant  in  more  trivial  affairs.  Never 
did  he  dine  or  go  to  bed  later  one  day  than  another.  No- 
body remembered  ever  to  have  seen  him  change  the  cut  of 
his  clothes,  and  down  to  his  last  days  his  wig  and  his  coat 
recalled  the  fashions  in  vogue  under  the  Cardinal  de  Eleury. 

After  recalling  his  kindliness  and  helpfulness  to  poor 
inventors,  for  whom  he  ever  evinced  the  heartiest  sympathy, 
his  biographer  concludes  in  eloquent  words,  with  which  I 
may  fitly  close  this  sketch  of  Desmarest' s  career.  "  The 
Academy  of  Sciences  saw  in  him,  as  it  were,  the  monument 
of  a  bygone  age,  one  of  those  old  philosophers,  now  too 
few,  who  occupied  only  with  science,  did  not  waste  them- 
selves in  the  ambitions  of  the  world,  nor  in  rambling 
through  too  wide  a  range  of  study,  men  more  envied  than 
imitated,  who  have  supplied  us  with  that  succession  of 
octogenarians  and  nonagenarians,  of  which  our  history  is 
full.  Living  like  these  worthies,  Desmarest  fulfilled  a 
similar  career,  and  reached  without  infirmities  or  any  grave 
malady  the  age  of  ninety  years.  He  died  on  the  20th 
September  1815. 

"  During  his  protracted  lifetime  he  saw  the  Academy 


7  8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

twice  renewed.  Among  so  large  a  number  of  colleagues 
he  doubtless  recognised  that  there  were  many  who  equalled 
or  even  surpassed  him  in  enlightenment  or  in  mental 
power,  but  he  had  the  happiness  to  be  assured  that  his 
name  would  last  as  long  as  that  of  any  one  among  them." 

For  the  sake  of  continuity  in  the  narrative,  I  have  traced 
the  labours  of  Desmarest  from  their  beginning  to  their 
close  without  adverting  to  those  of  his  contemporaries. 
His  views  regarding  the  volcanic  origin  of  basalt  were 
adopted  by  a  number  of  good  observers,  among  whom 
reference  may  be  made  to  Kaspe,  Fortis,  Dolomieu,  Faujas 
de  St.  Fond,  Montlosier,  and  Breislak.  But  a  still  more 
numerous  and  more  blatant  band,  urged  on  its  way  by 
Werner,  opposed  these  doctrines.  Although  the  contro- 
versy raged  through  Desmarest's  life,  he  took,  as  I  have 
said,  no  share  in  it.  He  made  an  occasional  allusion  to 
the  disorder  and  confusion  that  had  been  introduced  into 
a  question  which  in  itself  was  simple  enough  to  those  who 
knew  how  to  look  at  the  actual  facts.  He  asked  reproach- 
fully what  would  become  of  natural  history  and  mineralogy, 
if  every  question  were  treated  as  that  concerning  basalt 
had  been  ?  And  he  wrote  somewhat  scornfully  of  the 
authors  who,  without  having  ever  undertaken  any  re- 
searches of  the  kind  themselves,  ventured  in  discussing 
those  of  others  to  indulge  in  unfounded  hypotheses.1 
When  any  belated  straggler  from  the  enemy's  camp  came 
to  consult  Desmarest  on  the  subject  in  dispute,  the  old  man 
would  content  himself  with  the  answer,  "  Go  and  see." 

Leaving  this  controversy  for  consideration  in  the  next 

1  See  the  article  "  Basalte  "  in  vol.  iii.  of  the  Geographic  Physique,  pub- 
lished 1809. 


ii  Beginnings  of  Scientific  Travel  79 

lecture,  I  will  pass  from  the  subject  for  the  present,  for  the 
purpose  of  calling  attention  to  one  of  the  most  interesting 
features  of  the  scientific  life  of  the  closing  decades  of  last 
century — the  rise  of  the  spirit  of  scientific  travel. 

Of  all  the  physical  events  that  happened  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  there  was  probably  none  so 
fruitful  in  fostering,  among  the  civilized  countries  of  the 
world,  an  emulation  in  discovery  and  research,  as  the  transit 
of  Venus,  which  occurred  in  the  summer  of  1*769.  To  that 
event  we  owe  the  voyages  of  Cook,  and  all  the  rich  harvest 
of  results  which  they  added  to  our  knowledge  of  the  geo- 
graphy of  the  globe.  What  England  did  on  the  ocean,  it 
was  reserved  for  Kussia  to  rival  on  the  land.  The  Empress 
Catherine  II.  had  been  irritated  by  the  sarcastic  remarks 
made  by  a  French  astronomer  who  had  travelled  to  Eussia  to 
observe  the  previous  transit  of  Venus  in  1763,  and  she  is 
even  said  to  have  been  at  the  trouble  of  refuting  them 
herself.  At  all  events,  she  resolved  to  do  without  foreign 
assistance  for  the  second  transit.  Determined  that  the  work 
should  be  done  thoroughly,  and  in  such  a  way  as  to 
redound  to  the  glory  of  her  reign,  she  commissioned  the 
Academy  of  Sciences  of  St.  Petersburg  to  organize  the 
expedition.  This  undertaking  was  conceived  in  a  truly 
imperial  spirit.  Not  only  were  astronomers  sent  out  for 
the  more  immediate  objects  of  the  research,  but  advantage 
was  taken  of  the  occasion  to  despatch  a  competent  band 
of  observers  for  the  purpose  of  penetrating  into  every 
region  of  the  vast  empire,  and  making  known  its  condi- 
tion and  resources. 

The  instructions  drawn  up  for  the  guidance  of  the 


8o  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

explorers  were  of  the  most  exhaustive  kind.  Accurate 
observations  were  to  be  made  in  the  geography  and 
meteorology  of  each  region  visited,  the  positions  of  the 
principal  places  were  to  be  astronomically  determined,  the 
nature  of  the  soils,  the  character  of  the  waters,  and  the 
best  means  of  reclaiming  the  waste  places  were  to  be 
accurately  observed.  The  travellers  were  to  inquire  into 
the  rocks  and  minerals,  and  to  attend  to  the  outer  forms 
and  internal  composition  of  the  mountains.  They  were 
further  to  carry  on  careful  researches  among  the  plants  and 
animals  of  each  territory,  and,  in  short,  to  obtain  as  much 
accurate  information  as  possible  in  every  department  of 
natural  history.  Nor  were  the  social  problems  of  life  for- 
gotten. The  expedition  was  further  instructed  to  pay 
special  attention  to  the  various  races  of  mankind  met  with 
in  the  journeys,  and  to  report  on  their  manners,  customs, 
religions,  forms  of  worship,  languages,  traditions,  monu- 
ments and  antiquities.  They  were  likewise  enjoined  to 
take  note  of  the  condition  of  agriculture,  of  the  maladies 
that  affected  man  and  beast,  and  the  best  remedies  for 
them,  of  the  cultivation  of  bees  and  silk-worms,  the  breed- 
ing of  cattle  and  sheep,  and  generally  of  the  occupations, 
arts,  and  industries  of  each  province. 

A  survey  of  this  complete  nature,  carried  over  so  vast  a 
region  as  the  Eussian  Empire,  demanded  much  skill,  labour 
and  time.  It  was  fortunately  entrusted  to  a  man  in  every 
way  qualified  for  the  task— Pierre  Simon  Pallas  (1741-1811). 
The  whole  expedition  comprised  seven  astronomers  and 
geometers,  five  naturalists  and  several  assistants.  Start- 
ing from  St.  Petersburg  in  June  1768,  they  traversed  the 
vast  empire  to  its  remotest  bounds,  making  many  journeys 


Pallas  8 1 


in  every  direction.  After  six  years  of  unwearied  labour, 
and  almost  incredible  suffering  and  privation,  during  which 
Pallas  had  from  time  to  time  sent  home  accounts  of  his 
more  important  observations,  he  returned  in  July  1774. 

Never  before  had  so  large  a  store  of  observations  in  all 
departments  of  natural  history,  extending  over  so  wide  a 
region  of  the  earth's  surface,  been  gathered  in  so  brief  a  time. 
Pallas  wrote  his  results  in  German  (his  native  language, 
for  he  was  born  at  Berlin  in  1741),  and  sent  them  home 
as  they  were  ready.  They  were  published  at  St.  Peters- 
burg between  1772  and  1776,  in  three  quarto  volumes. 
They  were  afterwards  translated  into  French,  and  appeared 
at  Paris  during  the  years  from  1788  to  1793,1  in  five 
handsome  quartos,  with  a  folio  atlas  of  plates. 

Pallas  was  an  accomplished  naturalist,  and  made  some 
original  and  valuable  contributions  to  zoology.  But  it  is 
only  with  his  geological  work  that  we  are  here  concerned. 
One  of  the  geological  questions  which  especially  interested 
him  was  the  occurrence  of  the  remains  of  huge  pachy- 
derms in  the  superficial  deposits  of  the  north  of  Siberia. 
These  remains,  as  far  back  as  the  latter  years  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  had  been  known  to  exist,  for  a  trade 
in  the  ivory  tusks  of  fossil  elephants  from  the  Siberian 
coasts  and  rivers  had  before  that  time  been  carried  on. 
The  actual  bones  of  these  animals  were  subsequently  dis- 
interred by  observers  capable  of  describing  their  mode  of 
occurrence,  so  that  Pallas  had  his  curiosity  much  excited 
by  the  accounts  which  had  already  been  published.  There 
was  still  much  to  be  found  out  regarding  these  strange 

1  Another  edition  of  this  translation  appeared  in  8  volumes  8vo,  and 
was  reprinted  at  Bale  in  1806. 


82  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

relics  of  the  frozen  north,  and  Pallas  determined  to  in- 
vestigate the  subject  in  the  fullest  detail.  He  kept  his 
eye  open  for  every  trace  of  fossils  of  any  kind,  and  one  of 
the  most  valuable  parts  of  his  labours  is  to  be  seen  in  the 
precision  with  which  he  chronicles  every  fossiliferous 
locality.  But  the  most  astonishing  feature  of  his  journeys 
in  this  respect  was  the  proofs  he  obtained  of  the  almost 
incredible  number  of  bones  and  tusks  of  the  huge  pachy- 
derms. The  whole  vast  basin  of  Siberia  lying  to  the  east 
of  the  Ural  mountains  and  north  of  the  Altai  chain  to 
the  shores  of  the  Arctic  Ocean  was  found  by  him  to  be,  as 
it  were,  strewn  with  these  remains.  He  noticed  that  the 
bones  belonged  to  species  of  elephant,  rhinoceros  and 
buffalo,  and  in  one  case  he  saw  parts  of  the  carcase  of  a 
rhinoceros  still  retaining  its  leather -like  skin  and  its 
short  hairs.  From  the  abundance  of  hair  on  some  parts 
of  the  skin  of  these  animals,  he  inferred  that  the  rhino- 
ceros of  Siberia  could  live  in  a  more  temperate  climate 
than  its  descendants  now  enjoy. 

But  undoubtedly  the  most  important  contribution  made 
by  Pallas  to  geological  investigation  is  to  be  found  in  his 
memoir  on  the  formation  of  mountains  and  the  changes 
that  have  taken  place  on  the  globe,  particularly  with 
regard  to  the  Empire  of  Eussia.1  The  highest  mountains, 
he  remarked,  are  composed  of  granite,  with  various  schists, 
serpentine,  grits,  and  other  bedded  masses  in  vertical  or 
highly  inclined  positions.  These  formed  his  Primitive  band, 
and  in  his  opinion  were  older  than  the  creation  of  organized 
beings,  for  no  trace  of  organic  remains  was  to  be  found  in 
any  part  of  them. 

1  Act.  Acad.  Sci.  Imp.  Petropolit.  1777,  pp.  21-64. 


Pallas  83 


The  primitive  schistose  band  of  the  great  chains  is 
immediately  succeeded  by  the  calcareous  band,  which 
consists  first  of  solid  masses  of  limestone,  either  containing 
no  marine  productions  or  only  slight  traces  of  them.  The 
thick  beds  of  limestone  are  placed  at  high  angles  and 
parallel  to  the  direction  of  the  chain,  which  is  also  gener- 
ally that  of  the  schistose  band.  As  they  recede  from  the 
line  of  the  mountains,  the  limestones  rapidly  sink  down 
into  a  horizontal  position,  and  soon  appear  full  of  shells, 
corals  and  other  marine  organisms.  These  upheaved  lime- 
stones form  his  Secondary  mountains.  A  third  series  of 
rocks,  which  seemed  to  him  to  be  the  record  of  some  of 
the  latest  revolutions  of  the  globe,  consists  of  sandstones, 
marls,  and  various  other  strata,  forming  a  chain  of  lower 
hills  in  front  of  the  limestone  range.  To  this  series  of 
deposits  he  gave  the  name  of  Tertiary  mountains. 

These  geological  terms,  thus  proposed  by  Pallas,  were 
not  of  course  used  by  him  in  their  more  precise  modern 
definition.  We  know,  for  example,  that  his  Tertiary 
mountains  consisted  mainly  of  the  younger  Palaeozoic 
sediments  which  are  now  called  Permian,  and  that  with 
these  ancient  formations  he  included  the  sands  and  clays 
that  inclose  the  remains  of  mammoth,  rhinoceros  and 
other  extinct  mammals. 

The  main  value  of  his  observations  lies  in  his  clear 
recognition  of  a  geological  sequence  in  passing  from  the 
centre  to  the  outside  of  a  mountain-chain.  He  saw  that 
the  oldest  portions  were  to  be  found  along  the  axis  of  the 
chain,  and  the  youngest  on  the  lower  grounds  on  either 
side.  He  recognized  also  that  the  sea  had  left  abundant 
proofs  of  its  former  presence  on  the  land,  he  thought  that 


84  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

its  level  had  never  been  more  than  100  fathoms  higher 
than  at  present,  and  he  supposed  that  the  elevation  of  the 
mountains  had  been  caused  by  commotions  of  the  globe.1 

We  now  pass  from  the  Ural  chain  which  served  Pallas 
as  his  type  of  mountain-structure  to  another  and  more 
famous  group  of  mountains,  where,  during  the  same  period, 
another  not  less  zealous  explorer  was  at  work.  The 
labours  of  De  Saussure  among  the  Alps  mark  an  epoch, 
not  only  in  the  investigation  of  the  history  of  the  globe, 
but  in  the  relations  of  civilized  mankind  to  the  mountains 
which  diversify  the  surface  of  the  land. 

Up  till  towards  the  end  of  last  century  mountain- 
scenery  was  usually  associated  in  men's  minds  with  ideas 
of  horror,  danger,  and  repulsion.  Every  reader  of  English 
literature  will  remember  passages,  alike  among  poets  and 
prose-writers,  wherein  the  strongest  abhorrence  is  ex- 
pressed for  the  high,  rugged  and  desolate  regions  of  the 
earth.  These  tracts,  which  had  in  themselves  no  attractions, 
were  generally  looked  upon  as  best  seen  from  a  distance, 
and  not  to  be  entered  or  traversed  save  on  the  direst 
compulsion. 

This  prejudice,  which  we  all  now  laugh  at,  was  first  broken 
down  by  the  scientific  researches  of  Horace-Benedict  de 
Saussure  (1740-1799),  from  which  we  may  date  the  rise  of 
the  modern  spirit  of  mountaineering.  He  it  was  who  first 
taught  the  infinite  charm  and  variety  of  mountain-scenery, 
the  endless  multiplicity  of  natural  phenomena  there  to  be 
seen,  and  the  enthusiasm  which  the  mountain- world  will 

1  See  the  summary  of  Pallas's  views  given  by  D'Archiac  in  his  Cours 
de  PaUontologie  Stratigraphique,  p.  159,  1862.  For  a  fuller  exposition 
consult  Journal  de  Physique,  xiii.  (1779),  pp.  329-350. 


ii  Horace- Benedict  de  Saussure  85 

awaken  in  the  heart  of  every  responsive  climber.  How 
few  among  the  thousands  who  every  year  repair  to  the 
Alps,  the  Pyrenees,  the  Caucasus,  or  who  find  their  way 
to  the  peaks  of  the  Eocky  Mountains  and  the  Sierra 
Nevada,  are  aware  of  the  debt  they  owe  to  the  great 
geologist  of  Geneva ! 

De  Saussure  was  born  in  that  city  in  the  year  1740. 
His  career  at  college  was  so  distinguished  that  at  twenty 
years  of  age  he  became  a  candidate  for  a  professorship  of 
mathematics,  and  at  two-and-twenty  obtained  one  of  philo- 
sophy. Trained  in  physical  science,  he  acquired  habits 
of  exactitude  in  observation  and  reasoning,  which  stood  him 
in  good  stead  in  the  scientific  life  to  which  he  eventually 
devoted  himself.  Botany  was  his  first  love,  and  after  a 
long  and  fruitful  devotion  to  other  parts  of  the  domain  of 
science,  it  was  to  plants  that  he  turned  again  at  last  in  the 
closing  years  of  his  life.  Amidst  his  laborious  campaigns 
in  the  Alps,  the  plants  of  the  mountains  never  lost  their 
charm  for  him.  Among  the  highest  crests,  surrounded  by 
all  that'  Is  most  impressive  in  nature,  and  occupied  with 
the  profoundest  problems  in  the  history  of  the  globe,  he 
would  carefully  gather  the  smallest  flower  and  mark  it 
with  pleasure  in  his  notebook.1 

De  Saussure's  attitude  towards  his  native  mountains 
may  be  inferred  from  a  few  of  the  sentences  with  which 
he  prefaces  his  immortal  work.  "It  is  the  study  of 
mountains  which  above  all  else  can  quicken  the  progress 
of  the  theory  of  the  earth  or  geology.  The  plains 
are  uniform,  and  allow  the  rocks  to  be  seen  only 
where  these  have  been  excavated  by  running  water 

1  Cuvier,  "  Eloge  de  Saussure,"  filoges,  vol.  i.  p.  411. 


86  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

or  by  man.  The  high  mountains,  on  the  other  hand, 
infinitely  varied  in  their  composition  as  in  their  forms, 
present  gigantic  natural  sections  wherein  the  order,  the 
position,  the  direction,  the  thickness  and  the  nature  of  the 
different  formations  of  which  they  are  composed,  as  well 
as  the  fissures  which  traverse  them,  can  be  seen  with  the 
greatest  clearness  and  at  one  view.  Nevertheless,  to  no 
purpose  are  these  facilities  of  observation  offered,  if  those 
who  propose  to  study  the  question  do  not  know  how  to  con- 
sider these  grand  objects  as  a  whole  and  in  their  widest 
relations.  The  sole  object  of  most  travellers  who  call 
themselves  naturalists  is  to  collect  curiosities ;  they  walk, 
or  rather  they  crawl,  with  their  eyes  fixed  on  the  ground, 
picking  up  little  bits  here  and  there,  without  aiming  at 
any  general  observations.  They  are  like  an  antiquary 
who  at  Eome,  with  the  Pantheon  and  the  Colosseum  in 
front  of  him,  should  scrape  the  ground  to  seek  for  pieces 
of  coloured  glass  without  ever  casting  his  eyes  on  the 
architecture  of  these  superb  edifices.  It  is  not  that  I 
advise  the  neglect  of  detailed  observations.  On  the 
contrary,  I  look  upon  them  as  the  only  basis  of  solid 
knowledge.  But  while  we  gather  these  details,  I  desire 
that  we  should  never  lose  sight  of  the  great  masses,  and 
that  we  should  always  make  a  knowledge  of  the  great 
objects  and  their  relations,  our  aim  in  studying  their  small 
parts. 

-"•  "But  to  observe  these  mighty  masses  we  must  not 
content  ourselves  with  following  the  high-roads,  which 
nearly  always  wind  through  the  valleys,  and  which  never 
cross  the  mountains,  save  by  the  lowest  passes.  We 
must  quit  the  beaten  tracks,  and  climb  to  the  lofty 


De  Saussure  87 


summits,  whence  the  eye  can  take  in  at  one  sweep  a  multi- 
plicity of  objects.  Such  excursions  are  toilsome,  I  admit ; 
we  must  relinquish  carriages,  and  even  horses,  endure  great 
fatigue,  and  expose  ourselves  sometimes  to  considerable 
danger.  Many  a  time  the  naturalist,  when  almost  within 
reach  of  a  summit  on  which  he  eagerly  longs  to  stand, 
may  doubt  whether  he  has  still  strength  enough  left  to 
reach  it,  or  whether  he  can  surmount  the  precipices  which 
guard  its  approaches.  But  the  keen  fresh  air  which  he 
breathes  makes  a  balm  to  flow  in  his  veins  that  restores 
him,  and  the  expectation  of  the  great  panorama  which  he 
will  enjoy,  and  of  the  new  truths  which  it  will  display  to 
him,  renews  his  strength  and  his  courage.  He  gains  the 
top.  His  eyes,  dazzled  and  drawn  equally  in  every 
direction,  at  first  know  not  where  to  fix  themselves.  By 
degrees  he  grows  accustomed  to  the  great  light,  makes 
choice  of  the  objects  that  should  chiefly  occupy  his 
attention,  and  determines  the  order  to  be  followed  in 
observing  them.  But  what  words  can  describe  the  sensa- 
tions or  the  ideas  with  which  the  sublime  spectacle  fills 
the  soul  of  the  philosopher.  Standing  as  it  were  above  the 
globe,  he  seems  to  discover  the  forces  that  move  it,  at 
least  he  recognizes  the  principal  agents  that  effect  its 
revolutions." 

De  Saussure  spent  his  life  among  the  scenes  he  so 
enthusiastically  described,  studying  the  meteorology  no 
less  than  the  geology  of  the  Alps.  As  regards  the 
geological  structure  of  the  mountains  and  the  origin  of 
their  component  rocks,  he  seems  hardly  to  have  advanced 
beyond  the  ideas  of  Pallas.  He  believed,  with  Werner, 
that  the  central  granite  had  resulted  from  deposition  and 


88  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

crystallization  in  the  waters  of  a  primeval  ocean.  The 
vertical  or  highly  inclined  limestones,  and  other  strata 
flanking  the  granite,  were  for  a  long  time  regarded  by  him 
as  still  in  the  position  in  which  they  were  originally  de- 
posited. It  was  only  when  he  found  among  these  strata 
layers  of  sand  and  rounded  pebbles  that  he  was  driven  to 
admit  that  there  had  been  some  disturbance  of  the  earth's 
surface. 

Like  Pallas  and  his  contemporaries  generally,  De 
Saussure  never  attempted  to  set  down  his  observations  of 
the  distribution  of  the  rock  formations  upon  a  map,  nor, 
though  he  had  before  him  the  excellent  sections  con- 
structed by  Lehmann,  to  which  reference  will  be  made 
in  the  following  lecture,  did  he  give  definite  expression  to 
his  ideas  of  the  mutual  relations  of  the  rocks  by  construct- 
ing a  horizontal  section  even  of  the  most  general  and 
diagrammatic  kind.  It  is  thus  a  somewhat  laborious 
task  to  gather  from  his  Voyages  dans  les  Alpes  what 
precisely  were  the  opinions  he  held  in  regard  to 
tectonic  questions.  To  him,  however,  so  far  as  I  have 
been  able  to  discover,  we  owe  the  first  adoption  of  the 
terms  geology  and  geologist.  Our  science  had  formed  a 
part  of  mineralogy,  and  subsequently  of  physical  geography. 
The  earliest  writer  who  dignified  it  with  the  name  it  now 
bears  was  the  first  great  explorer  of  the  Alps.1 

1  In  the  year  1778  there  appeared  at  the  Hague  the  first  imperfect 
edition  of  De  Luc's  Leitres  Physiques  et  Morales  sur  les  Montagues,  in  the 
introduction  to  which  the  author  states  that  for  the  science  that  treats  of 
the  knowledge  of  the  earth  he  employs  the  designation  of  Cosmology. 
The  proper  word,  he  admits,  should  have  been  Geology,  but  he  "could  not 
venture  to  adopt  it  because  it  was  not  a  word  in  use  "  (Preface,  p.  viii.)  In 
the  completed  edition  of  his  work,  published  the  next  year,  he  repeats  his 
statement  as  to  the  use  of  the  term  Cosmology,  yet  he  uses  Geology  in  his 


De  Saussure  89 


De  Saussure's  theoretical  views  underwent  some  modi- 
fication during  the  prolonged  period  occupied  by  the 
publication  of  his  work,  though  they  seem  never  to  have 
advanced  much,  notwithstanding  his  constantly  increasing 
experience  and  the  enormous  amount  of  observations 
amassed  by  him  regarding  the  rocks  of  the  mountains. 

His  first  quarto  volume  appeared  in  1779,  the  second 
in  1786,  the  third  and  fourth  in  1796.  There  was  thus 
an  interval  of  fifteen  years  during  which,  with  unwearied 
industry,  he  continued  to  traverse  the  Alps  from  end  to 
end,  and  to  multiply  his  notes  regarding  them.  Yet  he 
does  not  seem  ever  to  have  reached  any  broad  conceptions 
of  stratigraphical  succession,  or  of  orographical  structure. 
When  he  came  upon  strata  crumpled  and  doubled  over 
upon  themselves,  he  thought  of  crystallization  in  place  as 
the  cause  of  such  irregularities.  The  idea  of  subterranean 
disturbance  would  sometimes  occur  to  him,  but  for  many 
years  he  dismissed  it  with  an  expression  of  his  incredulity, 
remarking  that  "  if  the  underground  fires  had  been  able  to 
upraise  and  overturn  such  enormous  masses,  they  would 
have  left  some  trace  of  their  operation,  but  that  after  the 
most  diligent  search  he  had  been  unable  to  discover  any 
mineral  or  stone  which  might  even  be  suspected  to  have 
undergone  the  action  of  these  fires."  1  He  had  thus  no 
conception  of  any  operation  of  nature,  other  than  that  of 
volcanoes,  which  could  produce  great  disturbances  of  the 


text  notwithstanding  (vol.  i.  pp.  4,  5).  In  the  same  year  (1779),  De 
Saussure  employs  the  term  Geology  in  his  first  volume  without  any  ex- 
planation or  apology,  and  alludes  to  the  geologist  as  if  he  were  a  well- 
known  species  of  natural  philosopher.  (See  his  Discours  Prdliminaire,  pp. 
vii.,  ix.,  xiv.,  xvi.) 

1  Voyages  dans  Us  Alpes,  vol.  iii.  (1796)  p.  107. 


90  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

terrestrial  crust.  Not  only  had  he  met  with  no  trace  of  any 
igneous  rock  in  the  Alps,  but  the  granite  veins  which  he 
found  traversing  a  schist,  and  which  he  at  once  regarded  as 
throwing  light  on  the  origin  of  that  rock,  were  believed  by 
him  to  be  almost  demonstrably  due  to  infiltration,  as  the 
granite  itself  had  been  formed  from  crystallization  in  the 
waters  of  the  ancient  ocean.1 

Even  when  he  found  the  vertical  conglomerate  of 
Valorsine,  and  recognized  that  it  must  have  been  originally 
deposited  horizontally,  he  refrained  from  hazarding  a  con- 
jecture as  to  the  reason  of  its  position.  "  We  are  still 
ignorant,"  he  says,  "  by  what  cause  these  rocks  have  been 
tilted.  But  it  is  already  an  important  step,  among  the 
prodigious  quantity  of  vertical  strata  in  the  Alps,  to  have 
found  certain  examples  which  we  can  be  perfectly  certain 
were  formed  in  a  horizontal  position." 2 

It  is  interesting,  however,  to  notice  that,  among  the 
agenda  which  he  inserted  at  the  close  of  his  last  volume, 
as  the  fruit  of  his  long  experience,  he  gives  a  chapter  of 
suggestions  as  to  what  should  be  looked  for  in  regard  to 
organic  remains  among  the  rocks.  Some  of  these  suggestions 
are  full  of  sagacity,  and  show  that,  though  he  had  not 
followed  them  in  his  own  researches,  he  recognized  the 
importance  of  the  advice  he  was  giving.  One  of  his  ad- 
monitions was  "  to  ascertain  whether  certain  shells  occur 
in  the  older  rocks  but  not  in  the  later,  and  whether  it  is 
possible  by  their  means  to  fix  the  relative  ages  and  eras  of 
appearance  of  the  different  species."  Another  recom- 
mendation is  "  to  compare  exactly  the  fossil  bones,  shells, 

1  Vol.  i.  pp.  533  et  seq. 
2  Vol.  ii.  §  690. 


De  Saussure  91 


and  plants  with  their  living  analogues  and  to  determine 
whether  they  differ  from  these." l 

One  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  De  Saussure's 
work  is  exhibited  in  the  care  with  which  he  equipped  himself 
for  the  study  of  the  rocks  of  the  region  that  he  undertook 
to  examine  and  describe.  Petrography  was  at  that  time  in 
a  very  embryonic  condition.  Linnaeus  and  Wallerius  had 
made  a  beginning  in  the  definition  of  rocks,  but  Werner's 
labours  had  hardly  begun.  The  Swiss  naturalist  set  himself 
with  his  usual  ardour  to  the  study,  into  which  he  introduced 
his  accustomed  order  and  precision.  Among  other  aids  in 
his  researches,  he  devised  a  series  of  experiments  in  fusion, 
in  order  to  determine  for  himself  the  probable  origin  of 
different  rocks,  and  especially  to  enable  him  to  decide 
whether  certain  varieties  could  be  produced  by  the  melting 
of  others.  It  will  be  remembered  that  Desmarest  had  pro- 
pounded the  doctrine  that  the  basalts  of  Auvergne  had 
been  formed  by  the  fusion  of  the  underlying  granite  by 
volcanic  fire.  De  Saussure,  when  he  began  to  study  these 
questions,  was  astonished  to  discover  how  little  had  been 
done  in  the  way  of  experimental  research  into  the  nature 
of  rocks.  He  selected  various  Swiss  granites,  and  found 
that  in  no  instance  could  he  reduce  them  by  fusion  into 
basalt.  In  case  there  might  be  any  deficiency  in  the  granites 
of  his  own  country,  he  tried  the  effects  of  a  high  temperature 
on  pieces  of  granite  which  he  had  himself  collected  in 
Auvergne,  but  equally  without  success.  He  then  ex- 
perimented on  a  granite  containing  abundant  schorl,  and 
obtained  a  black  vesicular  glass  sprinkled  with  the  white 
--grains  of  infusible  quartz.  He  next  took  specimens  of 
1  Vol.  iv.  p.  505. 


92  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

different  porphyries,  and  though  he  got  a  compact  black 
enamel,  nothing  appeared  in  the  least  resembling  basalt, 
whence  he  concluded  that  it  could  not  be  from  the  natural 
fusion  of  such  rocks  as  these  that  basalt  was  derived.1 

These  experiments  are  especially  interesting,  as  they 
mark  the  earliest  beginnings  of  experimental  geology.  The 
results  obtained  by  them  were  negative,  and  De  Saussure 
did  not  advance  further  along  the  path  he  had  thus  opened 
into  a  domain  which  was  destined  in  future  to  become  so 
fruitful  But  his  name  must  ever  be  had  in  honour  for 
the  share  he  took  in  establishing  the  use  of  direct  experi- 
ment in  the  elucidation  of  geological  problems.  He  did 
not  live  to  put  in  practice  the  directions  which  he  left  for 
the  further  exploration  of  the  Alps  by  those  who  should 
come  after  him.  A  disease,  which  perhaps  took  its  rise 
from  the  fatigues  and  privations  of  his  life  among  the 
mountains,  began  to  increase  upon  him  after  his  fiftieth 
year.  It  was  aggravated  by  anxiety  on  account  of  the 
effect  of  the  French  Eevolution  on  his  private  resources. 
After  three  successive  strokes  of  paralysis  he  died  in  1*799 
at  the  age  of  fifty-nine  years. 

De  Saussure  was  the  first  and  most  illustrious  of  that 
distinguished  band  of  geologists  which  Switzerland  has 
furnished  to  the  ranks  of  science.  To  his  inspiration  and 
example  we  owe  the  labours  of  Merian,Escher  von  der  Linth, 
Studer,  Favre,  and  the  later  and  living  observers  who  have 
so  diligently  and  successfully  unravelled  the  complicated 
structure  of  the  Alps.  His  descriptions  of  a  great  mountain- 
chain  form  admirable  models  of  careful  observation  and 
luminous  narrative.  Though  he  did  not  add  much  to  the 

1  Vol.  i.  p.  122-127. 


De  Saus sure  93 


advancement  of  geological  theory,  he  contributed  largely 
to  the  stock  of  ascertained  fact,  which  was  so  needful  as  a 
basis  for  theoretical  speculation.  The  data  which  he 
collected  became  thus  of  the  utmost  service  to  those  who 
had  to  work  out  the  principles  of  geology.  To  Hutton, 
for  example,  they  supplied  many  admirable  illustrations 
of  the  geological  processes  on  which  he  based  his  Theory 
of  the  Earth.  It  was  under  the  guidance  of  the  great 
Swiss  observer  that  the  Scottish  philospher  stood  in 
imagination  on  the  summit  of  the  Alps,  and  watched  from 
that  high  tower  of  observation  the  ceaseless  decay  of  the 
mountains,  the  never-ending  erosion  of  the  valleys,  and 
that  majestic  evolution  of  topography  which  he  so  clearly 
portrayed.  Among  the  illustrious  men  who  contributed 
to  plant  the  foundations  of  geology,  an  honoured  place 
must  always  be  assigned  to  De  Saussure. 


LECTUKE  III 

History  of  the  doctrine  of  Geological  Succession — Lehmann,  Fuchsel, 
Werner — The  spread  and  decline  of  Wernerianisrn — D'Aubuis- 
son,  Von  Buch. 

THE  most  casual  observation  suffices  to  convince  us  that 
the  surface  of  the  earth  has  not  always  been  as  it  is  to-day. 
At  one  place  we  recognize,  in  sheets  of  sand  and  gravel, 
proofs  of  the  former  presence  of  running  water,  where  none 
is  now  to  be  seen.  Elsewhere  shells  and  other  marine 
organisms  underneath  the  soil  prove  that  the  dry  land  was 
formerly  the  bed  of  the  sea.  Masses  of  sandstone,  con- 
glomerate and  limestone,  once  evidently  laid  down  in 
horizontal  layers  on  the  sea -bottom,  but  now  hardened 
into  stone,  disrupted,  placed  on  end,  and  piled  up  into 
huge  hills  and  mountain-ranges,  show  beyond  all  question 
that  stupendous  disturbances  attended  the  conversion  of 
the  sea-floor  into  land. 

These  proofs  of  former  revolutions  on  the  surface  of  the 
globe  are  so  abundant,  so  easily  comprehended  and  so 
convincing,  that  some  of  them  early  attracted  notice.  The 
frequent  references  to  them,  in  the  literature  of  ancient 
as  well  as  modern  times,  prove  how  familiar  they  have 
been  from  the  dawn  of  civilization.  They  have  suggested 
many  cosmologies  and  theories  of  the  earth,  for  there  has 


LECT.  in  Geological  Succession  95 

ever  been  a  craving  to  explain  the  origin  of  things.  But 
these  older  interpretations  of  nature  were  rather  exercises 
of  the  imagination  than  results  of  observation  and  de- 
duction. 

In  the  gradual  growth  of  knowledge  regarding  the 
history  of  our  globe,  it  is  surprising  how  late  men  were 
in  realising  that  this  knowledge  must  be  based  not  on 
mere  speculation,  but  on  patient  investigation  of  what 
evidence  can  be  gathered  from  the  structure  of  the  planet 
itself.  .Slowly  and  laboriously  the  truth  was  reached  that 
the  rocks  which  form  the  terrestrial  crust  bear  witness  to 
the  passage,  not  of  one  or  two,  but  of  a  whole  series  of 
revolutions,  that  these  changes  occupied  vast  intervals  of 
time,  and  that  while  they  varied  indefinitely  in  their  local 
effects  from  one  region  to  another,  they  were  but  incidents 
in  one  vast  onward  march  of  development  which  embraced 
the  whole  globe  within  its  influence.  What  we  now  know 
as  the  doctrine  of  geological  succession,  in  other  words, 
the  history  of  the  evolution  of  the  earth,  during  a  prolonged 
series  of  ages  up  to  the  present  time,  took  shape  with 
extreme  slowness,  each  generation  adding  a  little  to  the 
basis  of  fact  and  to  the  superstructure  of  inference. 

There  were  in  especial  two  lines  of  investigation  along 
which  progress  could  be  made.  On  one  of  these,  the  various 
masses  of  rock  that  are  visible  over  the  surface  of  the  globe 
had  to  be  studied  with  a  view  to  the  determination  of  their 
origin  and  sequence.  On  the  other  line,  the  details  of  these 
rock -masses,  and  more  particularly  of  the  sedimentary 
series,  had  to  be  worked  out,  and  their  organic  contents 
to  be  noted,  in  order  to  ascertain  how  far  the  living 
creatures  of  older  times  differed  from  those  of  the  present. 


96  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

The  former  of  these  two  branches  of  research  naturally 
came  to  be  pursued  first.  It  is  by  far  the  more  obvious 
of  the  two,  and  considerable  progress  had  to  be  made  in 
it  before  the  very  possibility  of  the  second  line  of  enquiry 
could  be  recognized  and  pursued. 

We  have  seen  that  with  all  his  sagacity  and  insight, 
Guettard  gave  no  indication  that  he  had  any  ideas  as  to 
the  chronological  relations  of  the  various  groups  of  strata 
which  he  included  in  his  "bands."  Neither  he  nor 
his  contemporaries  ventured  to  draw  geological  sections. 
We  have  found  that  even  De  Saussure  and  Pallas, 
though  they  saw  that  the  rocks  of  the  central  parts  of 
mountain-chains  are  older  than  those  of  their  flanks,  did 
not  definitely  express  their  ideas  on  this  subject  in  graphic 
form.  Desmarest  had  clearly  perceived  the  evidence  for 
a  long  sequence  of  volcanic  eruptions  in  Central  France, 
but  he  never  applied  this  evidence  towards  an  elucidation 
of  the  general  history  of  the  globe.  Yet  as  far  back  as 
the  time  of  Guettard,  the  first  seeds  had  been  sown  which, 
before  the  end  of  the  century,  were  to  germinate  in  so  wide 
an  expansion  of  geological  theory. 

I  propose  in  the  present  lecture  to  trace  the  history  of 
the  idea  of  geological  succession  during  the  latter  half 
of  last  century.  In  that  time  it  was  advanced  more 
particularly  by  three  observers,  Lehmann,  Fuchsel,  and 
Werner. 

The  earliest  definite  statements  as  to  a  recognisable  order 
among  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  crust  are  to  be  found  in  a 
treatise  by  Johann  Gottlob  Lehmann  (died  1767),  published 
at  Berlin  in  1756.  It  is  a  little  duodecimo  volume,  roughly 
printed  on  poor  paper,  extending  to  240  pages,  and  bearing 


Lehmann  97 


the  title  Versuch  einer  Geschichte  von  Flotz-G-eburgen,  etc. 
It  gives  the  results  of  the  author's  own  observations 
among  the  rocks  of  the  Harz  and  the  Erzgebirge.  He 
recognized  three  orders  of  mountains.  1st,  Those  which 
appeared  coeval  with  the  making  of  the  world ;  2nd,  those 
which  arose  from  a  general  alteration  of  the  ground ;  and 
3rd,  those  which  have  been  formed  from  time  to  time  by 
local  accidents.  The  first  order  is  distinguished  not  only 
by  the  greater  height  of  its  members,  but  by  their  internal 
structure.  The  rocks  are  less  various,  their  strata  are  not 
horizontal  but  vertical  or  inclined,  and  their  layers  are 
neither  so  weak  nor  so  multifarious  as  those  of  the  other 
groups.  Nor  are  they  mere  superficial  deposits,  but  they 
plunge  down  into  unknown  depths  into  the  earth's  interior. 
The  second  order,  or  Flotz-gebirge,  are  of  much  younger 
date,  and  have  arisen  from  the  successive  deposit  of  sedi- 
ments from  water  that  once  covered  their  sites,  these 
sediments  being  now  seen  in  flat  sheets  or  strata  piled 
above  each  other  to  no  great  height.  Lehmann  showed 
that  these  sedimentary  deposits  contain  abundant  petri- 
factions, such  as  remains  of  wild  animals,  shells,  plants 
and  trees.  He  gave  a  number  of  sections  to  show  the 
order  in  which  the  strata  succeed  each  other,  remarking 
that  the  coarser  sediments  were  generally  lowest,  while 
limestone  came  at  the  top.  His  profiles  of  the  succession 
of  strata  showed  a  remarkable  grasp  of  some  of  the 
essential  features  of  tectonic  geology.  It  is  singular  that 
these  suggestive  examples  should  not  have  had  more 
imitators  during  the  latter  half  of  last  century.  Nothing 
could  be  more  precise  and  distinct  than  Lehmann's  demon- 
stration of  the  stratified  nature  and  aqueous  origin  of  the 

H 


98  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

younger  formations  of  the  earth's  crust,  or  his  proofs  that 
the  strata  succeed  each  other  in  a  definite  order  in  the 
region  with  which  he  was  acquainted. 

Contemporary  with  Lehmann,  and  though  less  fre- 
quently quoted,  worthy  of  a  still  higher  place  in  the  bede- 
roll  of  geological  worthies,  was  George  Christian  Fuchsel 
(1722-1773).1  This  remarkable  man  was  the  son  of  a  baker 
in  Ilmenau,  at  the  northern  foot  of  the  Thuringian  Forest. 
He  studied  at  the  Universities  of  Jena  and  Leipzig,  and 
having  from  an  early  date  addicted  himself  to  minerals 
and  rocks,  he  was  lucky  enough  to  find  a  seam  of  coal  at 
Miihlberg,  near  Erfurt,  and  still  more  fortunate  to  receive 
from  the  proprietor  of  the  ground  a  reward  of  200  crowns 
for  the  discovery.  At  Erfurt  he  took  his  degree  of  Doctor 
of  Medicine,  and  eventually  became  physician  to  the  Prince 
of  Kudolstadt.  He  lived  to  the  age  of  only  fifty-one,  and 
died  in  the  year  1773. 

His  position  at  Kudolstadt  was  favourable  for  the 
cultivation  of  his  taste  for  geological  pursuits.  To  the 
south  rose  the  ancient  rocks  of  the  Thuringer  Wald, 
flanked  by  the  great  series  of  Permian  and  Triassic 
formations,  regularly  superposed  upon  each  other,  and 
cut  out  into  valleys  by  the  rivers  that  drain  the  mountain 
range.  In  the  year  1762,  when  he  was  forty  years  of  age, 
he  published  one  of  the  most  remarkable  treatises  which 
up  to  that  time  had  been  devoted  to  the  description  of  the 
actual  structure  and  history  of  the  earth.  It  was  in  Latin, 
and,  under  the  title  of  "  A  History  of  the  Earth  and  the 

1  For  the  data  here  given  I  am  indebted  to  a  brief  notice  by  C. 
Keferstein  in  the  Journal  de  Gtologie,  vol.  ii.  (1830),  p.  191,  and  to  his 
account  of  Fuchsel  in  his  Geschichte  und  Littcratur  der  Geognosie  (1840), 
p.  55  seq. 


Ill 


Fuchsel  99 


Sea,  based  on  a  History  of  the  Mountains  of  Thuringia," 
appeared  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Electoral  Society  of 
Mayence,  established  at  Erfurt.1  It  was  illustrated  with  a 
geological  map  and  sections  of  the  country.  Eleven  years 
later  he  published  in  German  a  Sketch  of  the  most  Ancient 
History  of  the  Earth  and  Man,  which  contained  a  further 
development  of  his  geological  views.2 

These  views  were  founded  on  the  author's  own  observa- 
tions in  the  region  where  he  had  been  born  and  passed  his 
life.  He  recognized  as  clearly  as  Lehmann,  and  with  more 
accuracy  of  detail,  the  sequence  of  stratified  rocks  resting 
in  gently-inclined  strata  against  the  older  upturned  masses 
of  the  mountains.  He  noted  the  position  of  the  Coal  with 
its  exotic  plants,  followed  by  the  copper-bearing  shales, 
Zechstein,  mottled  sandstone,  marls,  gypsum,  and  finally 
the  Muschelkalk. 

Taking  no  limited  or  parochial  view  of  the  phenomena 
that  presented  themselves  before  his  eyes,  he  connected  the 
history  of  his  little  principality  with  that  of  the  whole 
globe.  In  the  order  of  succession  of  the  rocks  around  him, 
he  saw  the  records  of  a  series  of  changes  which  the  earth 
had  once  undergone.  These  changes  were  conceived  by 
him  to  have  been  of  no  abnormal  kind,  but  to  have 
resembled  those  which  might  quite  possibly  occur  now, 
for,  in  his  opinion,  our  planet  had  always  presented 
phenomena  similar  to  those  of  the  present  time.  He  saw 

1  "Historia  terrae  et  maris,  ex  historia  Thuringiae  per  raontium  de- 
scriptionem  erecta"  (Trans.  Elect.  Soc.  Mayence,  vol.  ii.  pp.  44-209).    The 
map  was  the  first  detailed  geognostical  and  petrographical  map  of  a  large 
district  in  Germany,  and  the  sections  were  excellent  for  their  time. 

2  Entwurf  zu  der  dltesten  Erd-  und  Menschengeschichte,  275  pages,  8vo, 
1773. 


ioo  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

that  the  existing  dry  land  was  in  large  measure  formed 
of  strata  that  had  once  been  laid  down  on  the  floor  of  the 
sea,  like  the  sandstones,  marls  and  limestones  with  which 
he  was  familiar.  Eising  from  underneath  these  strata,  the 
older  and  inclined  rocks  of  the  mountains  appeared  to  him 
as  the  relics  of  a  more  ancient  continent,  which  had  in  like 
manner  been  built  up  of  marine  sediments.  He  believed 
that  the  tilted,  highly -inclined  positions  of  these  rocks 
were  due  to  their  having  tumbled  down  into  the  hollow 
interior  of  the  eartk 

Fuchsel,  with  singular  sagacity,  not  only  interpreted 
the  origin  of  individual  strata,  but  divined  that  a  con- 
tinuous series  of  strata  of  the  same  composition  constitutes 
a  formation,  or  the  record  of  a  certain  epoch  in  the  history 
of  the  globe,  thus  anticipating  a  doctrine  which  afterwards 
took  a  prominent  place  in  the  system  of  Werner.  All 
these  sediments  were  originally  deposited  horizontally. 
Where  they  have  been  placed  in  inclined  positions, 
the  alteration  was,  in  his  opinion,  to  be  attributed  to 
some  subsequent  disturbance,  such  as  the  effects  of  earth- 
quakes or  oscillations  of  the  ground.  To  earthquakes  also 
he  assigned  the  production  of  the  rents  which,  being  filled 
from  above,  now  form  veins  in  the  rocks.  It  was  his 
opinion  that  the  earthy  passage-beds  between  formations 
marked  intervening  periods  of  disturbance. 

The  Muschelkalk  in  Fuchsel's  district  forms  the  highest 
of  the  Secondary  formations,  and  is  succeeded  by  the 
various  alluvial  deposits.  These  youngest  accumulations, 
containing  only  terrestrial  remains,  were  looked  upon  by 
him  as  having  arisen  from  the  action  of  a  great  deluge. 

This  singularly  shrewd  observer  deserves  further  to  be 


Ill 


Fuchsel  101 


remembered  for  the  place  which  he  assigned  to  organic 
remains  in  his  theoretical  views  of  the  past  history  of  the 
earth.  He  clearly  recognized  these  objects  as  relics  of 
once  living  things.  He  saw  that  the  Coal  was  dis- 
tinguished by  its  land-plants,  the  Zechstein  by  its  gryphites, 
the  Muschelkalk  by  its  ammonites ;  further,  that  some 
formations  contained  only  marine  remains,  others  only 
terrestrial,  and  thus  that  the  latter  point  to  the  neighbour- 
hood of  ancient  land,  while  the  former  indicate  the 
presence  of  the  sea. 

The  clear  and  detailed  evidence  brought  forward  by 
Lehmann  and  Fuchsel,  that  the  materials  of  the  terrestrial 
crust  had  not  been  thrown  down  at  random,  but  succeeded 
each  other  in  a  certain  definite  order,  and  contained  a 
record  of  former  processes  and  changes,  like  those  in  pro- 
gress now,  ought  to  have  given  a  great  forward  impetus  to 
the  study  of  the  history  of  the  earth.  Lehmann's  work, 
however,  was  not  in  itself  attractive,  and  Fuchsel's  first 
essay,  though  by  far  the  most  detailed  and  philosophical 
treatise  on  the  subject  that  had  yet  appeared,  was  written 
in  Latin  and  buried  in  the  publications  of  an  obscure 
Society.  Fuchsel  himself  lived  quietly  in  a  little  town, 
with  no  disciples  to  spread  his  doctrines,  so  that  his  very 
name  remained  hardly  known  even  in  Germany,  while 
other  and  much  inferior  writers  achieved  a  wide  reputa- 
tion. His  writings  seem  to  have  dropped  out  of  sight, 
until  they  were  unearthed  and  brought  to  notice  fifty- 
seven  years  after  his  death  by  Keferstein.  The  seed 
sown  by  Lehmann  and  Fuchsel  was  thus  long  in  spring- 
ing into  abundant  growth.  During  the  remainder  of 
last  century  the  idea  of  geological  succession  was  pro- 


IO2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

claimed,  indeed,  from  the  housetops,  but  it  was  so  mingled 
with  fanciful  hypothesis,  that  its  truth  and  real  value 
were  almost  lost  sight  of. 

We  come  now  to  the  time  of  the  advent  of  a  man  who 
bulks  far  more  largely  in  the  history  of  geology  than  any 
of  those  with  whom  up  to  the  present  we  have  been 
concerned — a  man  who  wielded  an  enormous  authority 
over  the  mineralogy  and  geology  of  his  day.  Through  the 
loyal  devotion  of  his  pupils,  he  was  elevated  even  in  his 
lifetime  into  the  position  of  a  kind  of  scientific  pope,  whose 
decisions  were  final  on  any  subject  regarding  which  he 
chose  to  pronounce  them.  During  the  last  quarter  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  by  far  the  most  notable  figure  in  the 
ranks  of  those  who  cultivated  the  study  of  minerals  and 
rocks  was  unquestionably  Abraham  Gottlob  Werner  (1749- 
4817). 

The  vast  influence  which  this  man  wielded  arose  mainly 
from  his  personal  gifts  and  character,  and  especially  from 
the  overmastering  power  he  had  of  impressing  his  opinions 
upon  the  convictions  of  his  hearers.  It  was  an  influence 
of  a  curiously  mingled  kind.  From  one  point  of  view, 
Werner  appears  to  us  as  the  enthusiastic  teacher,  drawing 
men  from  all  countries  under  his  spell,  and  kindling  in 
them  much  of  his  own  zeal  for  the  study  of  minerals  and 
rocks.  In  another  aspect,  he  stands  out  as  the  dogmatic 
theorist,  intolerant  of  opinions  different  from  his  own, 
training  his  pupils  in  an  artificial  and  erroneous  system, 
and  sending  them  out  into  the  world  not  patiently  to 
investigate  nature,  but  to  apply  everywhere  the  uncouth 
terminology  and  hypothetical  principles  which  he  had 
taught  them. 


in  Abraham  Gottlob  Werner  103 

Though  he  himself  mixed  but  little  publicly  in  the 
dispute,  he  was  directly  the  cause  of  the  keen  controversy 
over  the  origin  of  basalt,  the  echoes  of  which  had  hardly 
ceased  when  some  of  the  older  geologists  of  our  day 
were  born.  I  have  myself  known  a  number  of  men 
who  remembered  well  the  acrimony  of  the  warfare, 
and  some  of  whom  even  played  the  part  of  combatants  in 
the  struggle.  Werner  had  a  large  following.  He  was 
undoubtedly  the  most  popular  teacher  of  the  science  of 
minerals  and  rocks  in  his  time.  His  services  to  mineralogy 
were  great,  and  have  always  been  freely  admitted.  By  the 
partiality  of  his  pupils  and  friends  he  was  also  raised  to 
the  highest  eminence  as  a  teacher  of  geology,  and  was  even 
looked  up  to  as  the  founder  of  that  science.  The  noise  of 
conflict,  and  the  plaudits  of  enthusiastic  disciples  have  now 
long  been  silent.  We  can  calmly  consider  what  Werner 
did,  in  what  state  he  found  the  science  of  the  rocks,  and 
in  what  condition  he  left  it.  As  the  result  of  my  own 
investigation  in  this  subject  I  have  been  compelled  to 
arrive  at  the  conclusion  that,  although  he  did  great  service 
by  the  precision  of  his  lithological  characters  and  by  his 
insistence  on  the  doctrine  of  geological  succession,  yet 
that  as  regards  geological  theory,  whether  directly  by  his 
own  teaching,  or  indirectly  by  the  labours  of  his  pupils 
and  followers,  much  of  his  influence  was  disastrous  to 
the  higher  interests  of  geology.  The  career  of  such  a 
man,  so  full  of  contradictions,  so  preponderant  in  the 
studies  to  which  it  was  devoted,  and  so  momentous  in  its 
effects  upon  the  progress  of  science  in  his  own  generation, 
merits  the  careful  consideration  of  all  who  would  realize 
how  geology  has  gained  its  present  place. 


IO4  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Werner  was  born  on  25th  September  1*749  at  Wehrau 
on  the  Queiss  in  Upper  Lusatia.1  His  ancestors  had  been 
engaged  in  the  iron  industry  of  that  region  of  Germany  for 
some  300  years.  His  father  was  inspector  of  Count  Solms' 
foundry,  and  at  one  time  it  seemed  as  though  the  future 
mineralogist  were  to  carry  on,  in  the  same  profession,  the 
traditions  of  the  family.  From  infancy  he  was  familiar 
with  stones.  When  still  hardly  able  to  speak,  it  was  one 
of  his  favourite  amusements  to  break  down  pieces  of  sand- 
stone and  marl.  After  he  had  begun  to  learn  his  alphabet, 
his  father,  as  a  reward  for  proficiency  in  his  lessons,  would 
allow  him  to  look  over  a  small  collection  of  minerals  which 
he  kept  in  a  box,  and  would  talk  to  him  about  them,  their 
origin  and  their  uses.  Late  in  life  Werner  could  vividly 
recall  the  very  minerals  that  were  the  playthings  of  his 
childhood — various  ores  and  spars,  as  well  as  some  varieties 
of  which  his  father  did  not  know  the  names.  When  he 
could  read,  his  favourite  books  were  lexicons  of  mining  and 
manufactures,  wherein  he  specially  selected  the  articles  on 
mineralogy.  His  tendencies,  thus  early  shown,  were  further 
fostered  by  his  father,  who  in  hours  of  leisure  would  enter- 
tain him  with  stories  of  the  mines. 

In  his  tenth  year  the  boy  went  to  school  at  the  old 
fortified  town  of  Bunzlau  in  Silesia,  and  after  a  few  years 
returned  in  1764  to  assist  his  father  and  become  controller 
of  the  smelting-houses  at  Wehrau.  But  the  aspirations  he 

1  For  the  biographical  details  given  in  this  sketch  I  am  indebted  partly 
to  the  "Kurzer  Nekrolog  Abraham  Gottlob  Werners,"  by  K.  A.  Blode,  in 
the  Memoirs  of  the  Mineralogical  Society  of  Dresden,  vol.  ii.  (1819),  p.  249, 
and  partly  to  the  $loge  on  Werner  by  Cuvier.  Blode,  who  had  access  to 
family  documents,  gives  1749  as  the  year  of  Werner's  birth  ;  Cuvier  and 
other  authorities  make  it  1750. 


TJNl  TY\ 

in  Werner  s  Early  Career  105 

had  formed  to  devote  himself  to  minerals  seem  at  last  to 
have  grown  too  strong  to  be  resisted,  so  that  after  doing 
his  duty  at  the  foundries  for  five  years  he  resolved  to 
betake  himself  in  1769  to  the  Mining  Academy  of  Freiberg, 
which  had  been  founded  two  years  before,  and  of  the 
attractions  of  which  he  had  no  doubt  heard  much.  Amid 
what  was  now  thoroughly  congenial  to  him,  he  threw 
himself  with  enthusiasm  into  the  work  of  the  school,  not 
only  availing  himself  of  all  the  formal  instruction  in  the 
art  of  mining  to  be  had  from  the  teachers,  but  visiting  all 
the  chief  Saxon  mines,  especially  those  of  most  importance 
in  the  Freiberg  district,  descending  the  shafts,  joining  in 
the  manual  labour  of  the  miners,  and  thus  making  himself 
master  of  the  whole  art  of  mining,  below  ground  as  well  as 
above.  His  zeal  and  capacity  were  soon  recognized  by  the 
officials  at  Freiberg,  and  before  he  had  been  long  there  he 
was  offered  a  place  in  the  Saxon  Corps  of  Mines.  He  was 
not  unwilling  to  accept  the  appointment,  but  determined 
first  of  all  to  prosecute  a  wider  range  of  study  for  a  few 
years  at  the  University  of  Leipzig. 

Accordingly,  after  some  two  years  spent  in  mining 
pursuits  Werner  went  to  Leipzig  in  the  spring  of  the  year 
1771,  and  for  the  next  two  years  devoted  himself  almost 
entirely  to  the  study  of  law.  In  his  third  and  last  year  at 
the  University,  he  seems  to  have  taken  up  a  miscellaneous 
series  of  subjects,  especially  modern  languages,  but  he 
settled  down  at  last  to  the  prosecution  of  his  first  love — 
mineralogy,  and  with  such  industry  and  enthusiasm  did  he 
pursue  this  study,  that  while  in  his  twenty-fifth  year,  and 
still  a  "student  of  the  science  and  law  of  mining,"  he 
published  his  first  essay — a  little  duodecimo  of  300  pages,  on 


io6  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  external  characters  of  minerals.1  "We  can  imagine  the 
astonishment  and  delight  of  the  lovers  of  mineralogy  when 
they  first  got  hold  of  this  treatise,  and  found  there,  instead 
of  the  miscellaneous,  isolated,  and  heterogeneous  observa- 
tions to  which  they  were  accustomed,  an  admirably  orderly, 
method  and  a  clear  marshalling  and  co-ordination  of  facts, 
such  as  had  never  before  been  seen  in  mineralogical 
literature. 

On  leaving  the  University  of  Leipzig,  Werner  went 
back  to  his  home  by  the  Queiss.  It  seemed  as  though  the 
authorities  at  Freiberg,  who  at  one  time  were  so  anxious 
to  secure  his  services,  had  now  forgotten  his  existence. 
He  had  heard  nothing  more  of  the  proposal  to  engage  him, 
and  began  to  arrange  his  plans  for  the  future.  But  the 
officials,  though  slow  in  their  movements,  had  not  lost  sight 
of  him.  They  had  made  note  of  his  progress  at  Leipzig, 
and  especially  of  his  admirable  little  book,  and  at  last  in 
February  1775,  to  his  own  astonishment,  Werner  received 
a  call  from  them  to  become  Inspector  and  Teacher  of 
Mining  and  Mineralogy  in  the  Freiberg  Mining  Academy 
at  a  yearly  stipend  of  300  thalers.  He  thus  attained  before 
he  was  twenty-six  years  of  age  the  position  in  which  he 
spent  the  rest  of  his  life  and  achieved  his  great  fame. 
For  some  forty  years  he  continued  in  the  same  appoint- 
ment. By  his  genius  he  raised  the  Mining  School  from 
a  mere  local  seminary,  founded  for  the  training  of  a  few 
Saxon  miners,  to  the  importance  of  a  great  academy  or 
university,  to  which,  as  in  mediaeval  times,  his  renown  as  a 

1  "Yon  den  aiisserlichen  Keiinzeichen  der  Fossilien,  abgefasst  von 
Abraham  Gottlob  Werner,  Der  Bergwerks- Wissenschaften  und  Rechte 
Beflissenen,"  Leipzig,  1774. 


in  Personal  Traits  of  Werner  107 

teacher  drew  pupils  from  all  corners  of  the  civilized  world. 
Men  advanced  in  years,  as  well  as  youths,  sometimes  even 
men  of  science  already  distinguished,  betook  themselves  to 
the  acquisition  of  German  that  they  might  attend  the 
lectures  of  the  great  oracle  of  geology. 

The  life  of  such  a  man,  seldom  tempted  to  stir  from 
home,  immersed  in  the  daily  discharge  of  the  duties  of  his 
office,  and  only  varying  from  year  to  year  the  subject  of  his 
prelections,  offers  little  incident  to  the  biographer.  More- 
Qver,  though  he  precociously  began  so  young  as  an  author,  he 
wrote  merely  a  few  short  treatises  and  papers  in  journals, 
thus  leaving  hardly  any  personal  memorial  behind  him.  It 
is  from  the  writings  of  his  pupils  that  we  chiefly  learn  what 
manner  of  man  he  was,  and  what  were  the  special  character- 
istics of  his  teaching. 

From  the  portrait  of  him  prefixed  to  one  of  his  works,1 
we  gather  that  his  large  keen  eyes  looked  out  beneath  a 
broad  and  high  forehead,  over  which  his  hair  was  dressed 
in  the  formal  wig-fashion  of  the  day,  and  turned  up  in  large 
curls  on  either  side.  The  round,  smooth-shaven  face  had 
as  its  most  conspicuous  feature  a  mouth  in  which,  while  the 
firm  lips  denoted  decision  of  character,  the  upward  curve 
on  either  side,  combined  with  a  slight  dimpling  of  the 
cheeks,  gave  the  impression  of  great  sweetness  of  disposition, 
with  a  touch  of  humour,  and  a  certain  degree  of  timidity. 
There  is  moreover  a  notable  trimness  of  person,  indicative 
of  the  exceeding  orderliness  of  his  whole  nature. 

His  personal  charm  must  have  been  altogether  remark- 
able. Cuvier  tells  us  with  what  paternal  fondness  Werner 

1  New  Theory  of  the  Formation  of   Veins.      Translated  by  Charles 
Anderson,  M.D.     Edinburgh,  1809. 


io8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

was  accustomed  to  treat  his  pupils.  There  was  no  sacrifice 
of  time  or  energy  which  he  would  not  make  for  their  sake, 
even  his  slender  purse  was  at  their  service  if  they  ever 
stood  in  need  of  pecuniary  help.  When  the  students 
crowded  round  him  so  that  only  a  portion  of  them  could 
conveniently  see  and  hear  his  demonstrations,  he  would 
divide  them  and  repeat  his  lecture.1 

His  manner  of  discourse  also  was  so  attractive  and 
stimulating  that  he  riveted  the  attention  of  his  pupils, 
incited  them  to  pursue  the  studies  that  he  loved,  and  fired 
them  with  a  desire  to  apply  his  methods.  Ostensibly  he 
had  to  teach  mineralogy — a  science  which  in  ordinary 
hands  can  hardly  be  said  to  evoke  enthusiasm.  But 
Werner's  mineralogy  embraced  the  whole  of  nature,  the 
whole  of  human  history,  the  whole  interests  and  pursuits 
and  tendencies  of  mankind.  From  a  few  pieces  of  stone, 
placed  almost  at  random  on  the  table  before  him,  he  would 
launch  out  into  an  exposition  of  the  influence  of  minerals 
and  rocks  upon  the  geography  and  topography  of  the 
earth's  surface.  He  would  contrast  the  mountainous 
scenery  of  the  granites  and  schists  with  the  tamer  land- 
scapes of  the  sandstones  and  limestones.  Tracing  the 
limits  of  these  contrasts  of  surface  over  the  area  of  Europe, 
he  would  dwell  on  their  influence  upon  the  grouping  and 
characteristics  of  the  nations.  He  would  connect,  in  this 
way,  his  specimens  with  the  migration  of  races,  the  spread 
of  languages,  the  progress  of  civilization.  He  would  show 
how  the  development  of  the  arts  and  industries  of  life  had 


1  There  is  an  enthusiastic  account  of  Werner  as  a  teacher  by  one  of  his 
pupils,  C.  A.  Bottiger  :  "  tfber  Werner's  TJmgang  mit  seinen  Schiilern,"— 
Auswahl.  Gesellsch.  Mineralog.  Dresden,  Band  ii.  p.  305  (1819). 


Ill 


Werner  s  Doctrines  109 


been  guided  by  the  distribution  of  minerals,  how  campaigns, 
battles,  and  military  strategy  as  a  whole,  had  been  dependent 
on  the  same  cause.  The  artist,  the  politician,  the  historian, 
the  physician,  the  warrior  were  all  taught  that  a  knowledge 
of  mineralogy  would  help  them  to  success  in  their  several 
pursuits.  It  seemed  as  if  the  most  efficient  training  for  the 
affairs  of  life  were  obtainable  only  at  the  Mining  School  of 
Freiberg. 

By  such  continual  excursions  into  domains  that  might 
have  been  thought  remote  enough  from  the  dry  study 
of  minerals,  and  by  the  clear  and  confident  method,  playful 
vivacity  and  persuasive  eloquence  with  which  they  were 
conducted,  Werner  roused  his  hearers  to  a  high  pitch  of 
enthusiasm.  No  teacher  of  geological  science  either  before 
or  since  has  approached  Werner  in  the  extent  of  his  personal 
influence  or  in  the  breadth  of  his  contemporary  fame. 

Let  us  now  inquire  what  were  the  leading  character- 
istics of  his  doctrines,  and  what  permanent  influence  they 
exerted  upon  the  progress  of  the  science  of  his  time.  His 
brilliance  and  discursiveness  might  attract  and  retain  large 
audiences,  but  his  lectures  must  have  possessed  more  solid 
and  enduring  qualities,  which  inspired  his  disciples  to  devote 
their  lives  to  the  studies  into  which  he  introduced  them, 
and  filled  them  with  the  ardour  of  devoted  proselytes. 

The  first  feature  to  which  we  may  direct  our  attention, 
distinguishable  in  every  part  of  his  life  and  work,  was  his 
overmastering  sense  of  orderliness  and  method.  This 
habit  of  mind  became  in  him  a  true  passion.  He  is  said 
to  have  bought  books  rather  to  arrange  them  systemati- 
cally than  to  read  them.  He  observed  the  details  of 
social  etiquette  as  punctiliously  as  the  characters  of 


1 10  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

minerals,  but  with  one  remarkable  exception,  to  which  I 
shall  afterwards  allude  ;  and  he  would  deliberate  over  the 
arrangement  of  a  dinner  with  as  much  gravity  as  over 
that  of  his  library  or  his  cabinet. 

We  cannot  take  up  any  of  Werner's  writings  without 
at  once  noting  this  prominent  peculiarity  of  his  mind. 
Every  fact,  every  proposition  is  definitely  classified  and 
ticketed,  and  even  if  he  has  little  or  nothing  to  say  under 
any  particular  subdivision,  the  subdivision  is  nevertheless 
placed  in  its  due  niche  all  the  same. 

This  methodical  habit  proved  of  the  greatest  service  to 
the  cause  of  mineralogy.  When  Werner  entered  upon 
his  mineralogical  studies,  the  science  of  minerals  was  an 
extraordinary  chaos  of  detached  observations  and  uncon- 
nected pieces  of  knowledge.  But  his  very  first  essay 
began  to  put  it  into  order,  and  by  degrees  he  introduced 
into  it  a  definite  methodical  treatment,  doing  for  it  very 
much  what  Linnaeus  had  done  some  years  before  for 
botany.  Like  that  great  naturalist,  he  had  to  invent  a 
language  to  express  with  precision  the  characters  which 
he  wished  to  denote,  so  that  mineralogists  everywhere 
could  recognize  them.  For  this  purpose  he  employed  his 
mother  tongue,  and  devised  a  terminology  which,  though 
artificial  and  cumbrous,  was  undoubtedly  of  great  service 
for  a  time.  Uncouth  in  German,  it  became  almost  bar- 
barous when  translated  into  other  languages.  What  would 
the  modern  English-speaking  student  think  of  a  teacher 
who  taught  him,  as  definite  characters,  that  a  mineral  could 
be  distinguished  as  "hard,  or  semi-hard,"  "soft  or  very  soft," 
as  "  very  cold,  cold,  pretty  cold,  or  rather  cold,"  as  "  forti- 
fication-wise bent,"  as  "  indeterminate  curved  lamellar,"  as 


Ill 


Werner  s  Geognosy  1 1 1 

"  common  angulo-granular,"  or  as  "  not  particularly  diffi- 
cultly frangible  "  ? l 

Werner  arranged  the  external  characters  of  minerals  in 
so  methodical  a  way,  that  they  could  readily  be  applied  in 
the  practical  determination  of  species.  Yet  strangely 
enough  he  neglected  the  most  important  of  them  all — that 
of  crystalline  form.  From  the  individual  minerals,  he 
proceeded  to  the  consideration  of  their  distribution,  and 
the  character  and  origin  of  the  different  rocks  in  which 
they  occur.  To  this  branch  of  inquiry  he  gave  the  name 
of  geognosy,  or  knowledge  of  the  earth,  and  he  defined  it 
as  the  science  which  reveals  to  us  in  methodical  order  the 
terrestrial  globe  as  a  whole,  and  more  particularly  the 
layers  of  mineral  matter  whereof  it  consists,  informing  us 
of  the  position  and  relations  of  these  layers  to  each  other, 
and  enabling  us  to  form  some  idea  of  their  origin.  The 
term  geology  had  not  yet  come  into  use,  nor  would  either 
Werner  or  any  of  his  followers  have  adopted  it  as  a 
synonym  for  the  "  geognosy "  of  the  Freiberg  school. 
They  prided  themselves  on  their  close  adherence  to  fact 
as  opposed  to  theory.  One  of  them,  with  pointed  refer- 
ence to  the  writings  of  Hutton  and  Playfair,  which  had 
appeared  shortly  before,  wrote  :  "  We  should  form  a  very 
false  conception  of  the  Wernerian  geognosy  were  we  to 
believe  it  to  have  any  resemblance  to  those  monstrosities 
known  under  the  name  of  Theories  of  the  Earth.  .  .  . 
Armed  with  all  the  facts  and  inferences  contained  in  these 
visionary  fabrics,  what  account  would  we  be  able  to  give 
of  the  mineralogy  of  a  country,  if  required  of  us,  or  of  the 

1  These  terms  are  all  taken  from  the  Wernerian  system  as  expounded 
in  English  by  Werner's  pupil,  Jameson. 


1 1 2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

general  relations  of  the  great  masses  of  which  the  globe  is 
composed  ? "  l  The  geognosts  boasted  of  the  minuteness 
and  precision  of  their  master's  system,  and  contrasted  the 
positive  results  to  which  it  led  with  what  they  regarded 
as  the  vague  conclusions  and  unsupported  or  idle  specula- 
tions of  other  writers.  Werner  arranged  the  crust  of  the 
earth  into  a  series  of  formations,  which  he  labelled  and 
described  with  the  same  precision  that  he  applied  to  the 
minerals  in  his  cabinet.  He  taught  that  these  formations 
were  to  be  recognized  all  over  the  world,  in  the  same  order 
and  with  the  same  characters.  The  students  whom  he 
sent  forth  naturally  believed  that  they  carried  with  them, 
in  this  sequence,  the  key  that  would  unlock  the  geological 
structure  of  every  country. 

But  never  in  the  history  of  science  did  a  stranger 
hallucination  arise  than  that  of  Werner  and  his  school, 
when  they  supposed  themselves  to  discard  theory  and 
build  on  a  foundation  of  accurately-ascertained  fact.  Never 
was  a  system  devised  in  which  theory  was  more  rampant ; 
theory,  too,  unsupported  by  observation,  and,  as  we  now 
know,  utterly  erroneous.  From  beginning  to  end  of  Werner's 
method  and  its  applications,  assumptions  were  made  for 
which  there  was  no  ground,  and  these  assumptions  were 
treated  as  demonstrable  facts.  The  very  point  to  be 
proved  was  taken  for  granted,  and  the  geognosts,  who 
boasted  of  their  avoidance  of  speculation,  were  in  reality 
among  the  most  hopelessly  speculative  of  all  the  genera- 
tions that  had  tried  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  theory  of 
the  earth. 

1  Jameson,  "Elements  of  Geognosy,"  forming  vol.  iii.  of  his  System  of 
Mineralogy,  p.  42.     The  italics  in  this  quotation  are  in  the  original. 


in  Werner  s  Universal  Formations          \  1 3 

"Werner's  first  sketch  of  his  plan  of  the  structure  of  the 
earth's  crust  and  the  succession  of  the  rocks  that  compose 
it  appeared  as  a  thin  quarto  of  only  28  pages,  published 
at  Dresden  in  the  year  1787.1  It  was  descriptive  rather 
than  theoretical,  and  was  marked  by  all  its  author's  pre- 
cision and  orderliness  of  statement.  It  contained  the 
essence  of  his  system  in  its  simplest  form.  In  later  years, 
as  we  shall  see,  further  experience  compelled  him  to  en- 
large and  modify  the  system,  but  without  changing  the 
fundamental  conceptions  on  which  it  was  founded.  The 
modifications,  however,  were  not  embodied  by  Werner  in 
any  later  edition  of  his  work.  They  were  given  by  him 
from  time  to  time  in  his  lectures,  and  gradually  became 
known  from  the  writings  of  his  students.  One  of  the 
most  devoted  and  distinguished  of  these  followers  was 
Robert  Jameson,  who  afterwards  became  Professor  of 
Natural  History  in  the  University  of  Edinburgh.  He 
was  mainly  instrumental  in  introducing  the  Wernerian 
doctrines  into  Britain,  and  continued  for  many  years  to  be 
their  most  ardent  supporter.  In  many  respects  the  fullest 
accounts  of  Werner's  views  are  to  be  found  in  the  various 
works  of  the  Edinburgh  Professor,  and  I  shall  cite  some 
passages  from  them  in  the  present  lecture. 

One  of  the  fundamental  postulates  of  the  Wernerian 
doctrines  was  the  existence  of  what  were  termed  universal 
formations.  When  he  elaborated  his  system,  Werner  had 
never  been  out  of  Saxony  and  the  immediately  adjacent 
regions.  His  practical  knowledge  of  the  earth  was,  there- 


von  A.  G.  Werner,  Bergakademie  Inspector,  und  Lehrer  der  Bergbaukunst 
und  Mineralogie  zu  Freiberg.     Dresden,  1787. 

I 


ii4  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

fore,  confined  to  what  he  could  see  there,  and  so  little  was 
then  known  of  the  geological  structure  of  the  globe  as  a 
whole,  that  he  could  not  add  much  to  his  acquaintance 
with  the  subject  by  reading  what  had  been  observed  by 
others.  With  this  slender  stock  of  acquirement,  he  adopted 
the  old  idea  that  the  whole  globe  had  once  been  sur- 
rounded with  an  ocean  of  water,  at  least  as  deep  as  the 
mountains  are  high,  and  he  believed  that  from  this  ocean 
there  were  deposited  by  chemical  precipitation  the  solid 
rocks  which  now  form  most  of  the  dry  land.  He  taught 
that  these  original  formations  were  universal,  extending 
round  the  whole  globe,  though  not  without  interruption, 
and  that  they  followed  each  other  in  a  certain  order.  He 
affirmed  that  the  first-formed  rocks  were  entirely  of 
chemical  origin,  and  he  called  them  Primitive,  including 
in  them  granite,  which  was  the  oldest,  gneiss,  mica-slate, 
clay-slate,  serpentine,  basalt,  porphyry,  and  concluding  with 
syenite  as  the  youngest.  Succeeding  these  came  what  he 
afterwards  separated  as  the  Transition  Eocks,  consisting 
chiefly  of  chemical  productions  (grey wacke,  greywacke-slate 
and  limestone),  but  comprising  the  earliest  mechanical 
depositions,  and  indicating  the  gradual  lowering  of  the  level 
of  the  universal  ocean.  Still  newer,  and  occupying,  on  the 
whole,  lower  positions,  marking  the  continued  retirement 
of  the  waters,  were  the  Floetz  Eocks,  composed  partly  of 
chemical,  but  chiefly  of  mechanical  sediments,  and  includ- 
ing sandstone,  limestone,  gypsum,  rock-salt,  coal,  basalt, 
obsidian,  porphyry,  and  other  rocks.  Latest  of  all  came 
the  Alluvial  series,  consisting  of  recent  loams,  clays,  sands, 
gravels,  sinters,  and  peat. 

This   system  was   not  put  forward   tentatively  as   a 


in  Werners  Dogmatism  115 

suggestion  towards  a  better  comprehension  of  the  history 
of  the  earth.  It  was  announced  dogmatically  as  a  body 
of  ascertained  truth,  about  which  there  could  be  no  further 
doubt  or  dispute.  Let  me  quote  by  way  of  illustration  a 
few  sentences  from  Werner's  Theory  of  Veins,  where  he 
definitely  expresses  his  opinions  on  these  matters.  "  In 
recapitulating  the  state  of  our  present  knowledge,"  he 
observes,  "  it  is  obvious  that  we  know  with  certainty  that 
the  floetz  and  primitive  mountains  have  been  produced  by 
a  series  of  precipitations  and  depositions  formed  in  succes- 
sion from  water  which  covered  the  globe.  We  are  also 
certain  that  the  fossils  which  constitute  the  beds  and 
strata  of  mountains  were  dissolved  in  this  universal  water 
and  were  precipitated  from  it ;  consequently  the  metals 
and  minerals  found  in  primitive  rocks,  and  in  the 
beds  of  floetz  mountains,  were  also  contained  in  this 
universal  solvent,  and  were  formed  from  it  by  pre- 
cipitation. We  are  still  further  certain  that  at  different 
periods,  different  fossils  have  been  formed  from  it,  at  one 
time  earthy,  at  another  metallic  minerals,  at  a  third  time 
some  other  fossils.  We  know,  too,  from  the  position  of 
these  fossils,  one  above  another,  to  determine  with  the 
utmost  precision  which  are  the  oldest,  and  which  the 
newest  precipitates.  We  are  also  convinced  that  the  solid 
mass  of  our  globe  has  been  produced  by  a  series  of  precipi- 
tations formed  in  succession  (in  the  humid  way) ;  that  the 
pressure  of  the  materials,  thus  accumulated,  was  not  the 
same  throughout  the  whole  ;  and  that  this  difference  of 
pressure  and  several  other  concurring  causes  have  pro- 
duced rents  in  the  substance  of  the  earth,  chiefly  in  the 
most  elevated  parts  of  its  surface,  We  are  also  persuaded 


1 1 6  The  Founders  of  Geology    .  LECT. 

that  the  precipitates  taking  place  from  the  universal  water 
must  have  entered  into  the  open  fissures  which  the  water 
covered.  We  know,  moreover,  for  certain,  that  veins  bear 
all  the  marks  of  fissures  formed  at  different  times  ;  and, 
by  the  causes  which  have  been  assigned  for  their  formation, 
that  the  mass  of  veins  is  absolutely  of  the  same  nature  as 
the  beds  and  strata  of  mountains,  and  that  the  nature  of 
the  masses  differs  only  according  to  the  locality  of  the 
cavity  where  they  occur.  In  fact,  the  solution  contained 
in  its  great  reservoir  (that  excavation  which  held  the 
universal  water)  was  necessarily  subjected  to  a  variety  of 
motion,  whilst  that  part  of  it  which  was  confined  to  the 
fissures  was  undisturbed,  and  deposited  in  a  state  of 
tranquillity  its  precipitate." * 

It  would  be  difficult  to  cite  from  any  other  modern 
scientific  treatise  a  series  of  consecutive  sentences  contain- 
ing a  larger  number  of  dogmatic  assertions,  of  which  almost 
every  one  is  contradicted  by  the  most  elementary  facts  of 
observation.  The  habit  of  confident  affirmation  seems  to 
have  blinded  Werner  to  the  palpable  absurdity  of  some  of 
his  statements.  When,  for  example,  he  speaks  of  the  great 
reservoir  or  excavation  which  held  the  universal  water, 
what  idea  could  have  been  present  to  his  mind  ?  If  the 
primeval  ocean,  as  he  asserted,  surrounded  the  whole  globe, 
and  was  as  deep  as  the  mountains  are  high,  where  was 
the  excavation  ?  As  an  acute  writer  in  the  Edinburgh 
Review  pointed  out,  the  excavation  spoken  of  by  Werner 
"  can  mean  nothing  else  than  the  convexity  of  the  solid 
nucleus  round  which  the  universal  water  was  diffused.  To 

1  Neue   Theorie  von  der  Enstehung  der  Gangen,  chap.  vii.  §  68  (1791). 
English  translation  by  Anderson,  p.  110  (1809). 


in  Werners  Universal  Ocean  117 

call  this  convexity  an  excavation,  is  to  use  such  a  freedom 
with  language  as  can  only  b'e  accounted  for  by  the  per- 
plexity in  which  every  man,  of  whatever  talents,  must  find 
himself  involved  when  he  attempts  to  describe  a  whole, 
of  which  the  parts  are  inconsistent  with  one  another." x 

The  theory  of  a  primeval  universal  ocean  that  over- 
topped the  mountains,  which  formed  the  basis  of  Werner's 
teaching,  led  in  every  direction  to  such  manifest  contradic- 
tions and  absurdities,  that  we  need  a  little  patience  and 
some  imagination  to  picture  to  ourselves  how  it  could  have 
been  received  and  fervently  believed  in  by  men  of  intel- 
ligence, to  whom  the  facts  of  the  earth's  structure  were 
not  wholly  unknown.  It  was  claimed  for  Werner  that 
the  doctrine  of  a  universal  and  gradually  subsiding  ocean, 
though  it  had  been  taught  long  before  his  time,  was  first 
demonstrated  by  him  to  be  true,  (1)  because  he  found  the 
older  strata  occupying  the  highest  eminences,  and  the 
younger  coming  in  at  successively  lower  levels,  down  to 
the  modern  alluvia  of  the  plains  and  the  sea-shore,  and 
(2)  because  the  primitive  and  loftiest  rocks  are  entirely 
formed  of  chemical  precipitations,  those  of  mechanical 
origin  not  appearing  until  a  much  later  period,  and  becom- 
ing increasingly  abundant  down  to  the  present  time,  when 
they  constitute  almost  all  the  deposits  that  are  now  taking 
place.2 

One  of  the  most  obvious  questions  that  would  arise,  we 
might  suppose,  in  the  mind  of  any  student  of  ordinary 

1  fflin.  Review,  xviii.  p.  90  (1811). 

2  Jameson's  Geognosy,  p.  78.     Werner's  followers,  from  the  prominence 
they  gave  to  the  sea  in  their  geognosy,  were  styled  Neptunists,  while 
those  of  Hutton,  who  dwelt  on  the  potency  of  the  earth's  internal  fire, 
were  dubbed  Vulcanists. 


1 1 8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

capacity  to  whom  the  theory  was  propounded,  would  be 
how  did  the  deep  primitive  ocean  disappear.  Steno, 
Leibnitz,  and  other  older  writers  had  conjectured  that  the 
waters  found  their  way  into  vast  caverns  in  the  earth's 
interior.  Such  a  conjecture,  however,  was  not  suited  to 
the  taste  of  the  true  Wernerian,  who  would  allow  no 
speculation,  but  took  his  stand  on  a  basis  of  ascertained 
fact.  Well,  we  may  be  curious  to  know  how  he  disposed 
of  the  difficulty.  Yet  we  shall  search  in  vain  through 
Wernerian  literature  for  any  serious  grappling  with  this 
obvious,  and  one  would  have  thought  formidable,  objection 
to  the  doctrine.  Werner  himself  appears  to  have  inclined 
to  the  belief  that  the  waters  vanished  into  space.  He 
thought  it  possible  that  "  one  of  the  celestial  bodies  which 
sometimes  approach  near  to  the  earth  may  have  been  able 
to  withdraw  a  portion  of  our  atmosphere  and  of  our  ocean." J 
But  if  once  the  waters  were  abstracted,  how  were  they  to 
be  brought  back  again  so  as  to  cover  all  the  hills  on 
which  his  highest  Floetz  formations  were  deposited  ? 

The  most  famous  of  the  English  followers  of  Werner, 
Jameson,  honestly  asked  the  question,  "  What  has  become 
of  the  immense  volume  of  water  that  once  covered  and 
stood  so  high  over  the  whole  earth  ? "  His  answer  may  be 
cited  as  thoroughly  characteristic  of  the  mental  attitude  of 
a  staunch  Wernerian.  "  Although,"  he  says,  "  we  cannot 
give  any  very  satisfactory  answer  to  this  question,  it  is 
evident  that  the  theory  of  the  diminution  of  the  water 
remains  equally  probable.  We  may  be  fully  convinced  of 
its  truth,  and  are  so,  although  we  may  not  be  able  to 
explain  it.  To  know  from  observation  that  a  great  pheno- 

1  See  D'Aubuisson's  Gtognosie,  i.  p.  414  (1819). 


in  Werner  s  Universal  Ocean  119 

menon  took  place,  is  a  very  different  thing  from  ascertain- 
ing how  it  happened."1  I  do  not  suppose  that  in  the 
whole  literature  of  science  a  better  illustration  could  be 
found  of  the  advice — "  When  you  meet  with  an  insuper- 
able difficulty,  look  it  steadfastly  in  the  face — and  pass  on." 

One  might  have  thought  that  having  disposed  of  the 
universal  ocean,  even  in  this  rather  peremptory  fashion, 
the  Wernerians  would  have  been  in  no  hurry  to  call  it 
back  again,  and  set  the  same  stupendous  and  inexplicable 
machinery  once  more  going.  But  the  exigencies  of  their 
theory  left  them  no  choice.  Having  determined,  as  an 
incontrovertible  fact,  that  certain  rocks  had  been  deposited 
as  chemical  precipitates  in  a  definite  order  from  a  universal 
ocean,  when  these  philosophers,  as  their  knowledge  of 
Nature  increased,  found  that  some  of  these  so-called  pre- 
cipitates occurred  out  of  their  due  sequence  and  at  much 
higher  altitudes  than  had  been  supposed,  they  were  com- 
pelled to  bring  back  the  universal  ocean,  and  make  it  rise 
high  over  hills  from  which  it  had  already  receded.  Not 
only  had  they  to  call  up  the  vasty  deep,  but  they  had  to 
endow  it  with  rapid  and  even  tumultuous  movement, 
as  it  swept  upwards  over  forest-clothed  lands.  Having 
raised  it  as  high  as  their  so-called  Floetz  formations  ex- 
tended, and  having  allowed  its  waters  to  settle  and  deposit 
precipitates  of  basalt  and  greenstone,  they  had  to  hurry  it 
away  again  to  the  unknown  regions  where  it  still  remains. 
This,  forsooth,  was  the  system  that  discarded  hypothesis 
and  rested  proudly  on  an  irrefragable  foundation  of  demon- 
strable fact. 

Among  the  features  of  the  Wernerian  school,  one  of  the 

1  Jameson,  op.  dt.  p.  82. 


1 20  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

most  singular  was  the  position  it  took  up  with  regard  to 
the  evidence  for  disturbances  of  the  earth's  crust,  and  for 
the  universality  and  potency  of  what  is  now  termed  igneous 
action.  A  hundred  years  before  Werner's  time  Steno  had 
pointed  to  the  inclined  and  broken  strata  of  Northern  Italy 
as  evidence  of  dislocation  of  the  crust.  The  Italian  ob- 
servers, and  especially  Moro,  familiar  with  the  phenomena 
of  earthquakes  and  volcanoes,  had  been  impressed  by  the 
manifest  proofs  of  the  potency  of  the  internal  energy  of 
the  earth  upon  its  outer  form.  But  these  early  adumbra- 
tions of  the  truth  were  all  brushed  aside  by  the  oracle  of 
Freiberg.  I  have  tried  to  imagine  the  current  of  thought 
by  which  Werner  was  led  to  this  crowning  absurdity  of 
his  system,  and  I  think  we  may  trace  it  in  the  history  of 
his  relation  to  the  basalt  hills  of  Saxony.  The  question  is 
of  some  interest,  not  only  as  a  curious  piece  of  human 
psychology,  but  because  it  was  on  this  very  point  of  the 
origin  of  basalt  that  the  Wernerian  ship  finally  struck  and 
foundered. 

The  year  after  his  appointment  as  teacher  of  mineralogy, 
Werner  visited  the  famous  Stolpen,  one  of  the  most  pictur- 
esque castle-crowned  basalt  hills  of  Saxony,  to  which  I 
have  already  referred  in  connection  with  Agricola's  revival 
of  the  old  word  "  basalt."  He  had  probably  by  this  time 
begun  to  form  in  his  mind  a  more  or  less  definite  picture 
of  chemical  precipitation  from  aqueous  solution,  as  applied 
to  the  history  of  rock -masses.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  he 
was  aware  that  basalt,  by  not  a  few  observers  before  his 
time,  had  been  claimed  as  a  rock  of  volcanic  origin.  How 
far  he  had  then  made  up  his  mind  as  to  the  formation  of 
that  rock  must  remain  in  doubt.  But  he  tells  himself  that 


Ill 


Werner  s  Views  on  Basalt  121 


at  the  Stolpen  he  "  found  not  a  trace  of  volcanic  action, 
nor  the  smallest  proof  of  volcanic  origin.     So  I  ventured 
publicly  to  assert  and  prove  that  all  basalts  could  certainly 
not  be  of  volcanic  origin,  and  that  to  these  non-volcanic 
rocks  the  Stolpen  mass  undoubtedly  belongs.     Though  at 
first  I  met  with  much  opposition,  yet  soon  several  geognosts 
came    over    to   my   views.     These  views  gained  special 
importance  from  the  observations  which  I  made  in  1777 
on  the  old  subterranean  fire  in  the  coal-field  that  lies 
around  the  hills  of  basalt  and  porphyry-slate  in  the  middle 
of  Bohemia,  and  the  consequent  pseudo-volcanic  hills  that 
have  arisen  there.     After  further  more  matured  research 
and  consideration,  I  hold  that  no  basalt  is  volcanic,  but 
that  all  these  rocks,  as  well  as  the  other  Primitive  and 
Floetz  rocks,  are  of  aqueous  origin."  x     Thus  ten  years  of 
reflection  had  only  served  to  make  him  more  positive  in 
maintaining  an  opinion  which  the  most  ordinary  observa- 
tion in  his  own  Saxony  ought  to  have  enabled  him  to 
disprove  and  reject.     He  had  not  only  asserted  that  basalt 
is  a  chemical  precipitate,  but  had  placed  it  among  his  primi- 
tive rocks. 

When  we  remember  the  long  and  patient  labours  of 
Desmarest  before  he  announced  his  conclusions  regarding 
the  volcanic  origin  of  basalt,  we  cannot  but  wonder  at  the 

1  Kurze  Klassification  und  Beschreibung  der  Verschiedenen  Gebirgsarten, 
1787,  p.  25.  Later  in  the  same  year  (1787)  he  visited  a  little  eminence 
near  Scheibenberg  in  the  Erzgebirge,  and  found  there  a  cake  of  basalt  lying 
on  clay  and  sand,  and  thought  he  could  trace  these  materials  passing  into 
each  other.  Whereupon  he  announced  as  a  "new  discovery"  that  all 
basalt  is  of  aqueous  origin,  and  constitutes,  with  clay,  sand  and  wacke, 
one  single  formation  which  originally  extended  far  and  wide  over  the 
primitive  and  floetz  rocks,  but  has  in  course  of  time  been  worn  away, 
leaving  only  cappings  on  the  hills. — Keferstein,  Geschichte  der  Geognosie, 
p.  69. 


122  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

audacity  of  Werner  in  discarding  these  conclusions  with- 
out comment,  and  announcing  an  entirely  opposite  opinion, 
rapidly  formed  on  the  slender  evidence  of  one  or  two  isolated 
patches  of  basalt.  It  was  not  as  if  he  claimed  to  apply  his 
explanation  merely  to  those  few  cases  which  he  had  him- 
self examined ;  he  swept  all  the  basalts  of  the  earth's 
surface  into  his  net.  His  view  had  not  even  the  merit  of 
originality,  for,  as  we  have  seen,  Guettard,  among  others, 
had  held  the  opinion  that  basalt  is  of  aqueous  origin.  But, 
announced  as  a  new  discovery,  with  all  the  authority  of 
the  great  Freiberg  professor,  it  commanded  attention  and 
met  with  wide  acceptance.  Even  from  the  time  of  its 
promulgation,  however,  it  awakened  some  opposition,  and 
it  became  the  subject  of  bitter  controversy  for  fully  a 
generation.  Only  a  month  after  Werner  proclaimed  his 
discovery  he  was  answered  by  J.  K.  W.  Voigt  of  Weimar, 
who  maintained  the  volcanic  nature  of  the  very  examples 
cited  by  the  professor.1  Werner  replied,  and  was  again 
answered,  but  soon  retired  from  the  combat  and  devoted 
his  energies  to  strengthen  his  theory.  As  an  instance  of  the 
wide  interest  taken  in  the  question,  I  may  mention  that 
even  at  Berne,  where  there  are  no  basalts,  nor  any  other 
traces  of  volcanic  action,  the  Society  of  Naturalists  of  that 
town  offered  a  prize  of  twenty-five  thalers  for  the  best  essay 
in  answer  to  the  question,  "  What  is  Basalt :  Is  it  volcanic 
or  is  it  not  ? "  The  successful  competitor,  after  elaborately 
reviewing  all  the  arguments  brought  forward  by  the 
vulcanists,  pronounced  in  favour  of  Werner's  views.2 

1  Bergmann.  Journ.  1788,  1789,  1791,  pp.  185,   347,  etc.     See  also 
Hoffmann's  Geschichte  der  Geognosie  (1838),  p.  117. 

2  J.   F.  W.  Widenmann,   Hb'pfner's  Magazin  fur  die  Erdkunde,  iv. 
(1789),  p.  135. 


Ill 


Werner  on  Volcanoes  123 


Werner  himself  made  two  contributions  to  the  discussion, 
one  giving  his  theory  of  volcanoes,1  and  the  other  his 
matured  views  upon  basalt.2 

Volcanoes  and  volcanic  action,  if  they  were  regarded  as 
betokening  any  potent  kind  of  reaction  between  the  interior 
and  the  exterior  of  our  planet,  were  utterly  antagonistic 
to  Werner's  conception  of  the  structure  and  history  of  the 
earth.  In  a  world  which  had  entirely  resulted  from  the 
precipitations  and  depositions  of  an  ocean  of  water,  there 
was  obviously  no  place  for  internal  fire.  In  the  system 
which  Werner  had  so  laboriously  devised,  it  was  impera- 
tively necessary  to  treat  volcanoes  as  modern  and  accidental 
phenomena,  which  never  entered  into  the  process  of  the 
formation  of  the  crust  of  the  earth.  Accordingly,  in  his 
earliest  sketch  of  his  classification  of  rocks,  he  placed 
volcanic  rocks  among  the  latest  of  the  whole  series.  And 
this  view  he  maintained  to  the  last.  That  volcanic  action 
had  been  in  progress  from  the  very  beginning  of  geological 
time,  and  that  it  had  played  an  important  part  in  building 
up  the  framework  of  the  land  in  many  countries  all  over 
the  globe,  were  ideas  that  seem  never  to  have  occurred 
to  him. 

We  have  seen  how  old  was  the  notion  that  volcanoes, 
or  "  burning  mountains,"  arose  from  the  combustion  of 
subterranean  beds  of  coal.  Werner  adopted  this  opinion, 
which  suited  his  system,  arid  was  quite  in  congenial 
surroundings  there.  In  1*789,  two  years  after  the  appear- 
ance of  his  little  Kurze,  Classification,  he  definitely 
announced,  in  one  of  the  papers  above  referred  to,  what 

1  Hopfner,  Magazinfiir  die  Erdkunde,  iv.  (1789),  p.  239. 

2  Bergmdnnishes  Journal,  1789,  i.  p.  252.     See  also  p.  272. 


124  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

he  called  the  "highly  probable  conjecture  that  most,  if 
not  all,  volcanoes  arise  from  the  combustion  of  under- 
ground seams  of  coal."1  The  coal  might  be  set  on 
fire  by  spontaneous  combustion,  and  the  most  vigorous 
volcanoes  would  be  those  starting  on  the  thickest  masses 
of  coal.  In  order  to  support  this  belief,  it  was  necessary 
to  furnish  evidence  of  the  existence  of  deposits  of  coal 
around  volcanoes.  And  much  research  and  ingenuity 
were  displayed  in  collecting  all  the  known  examples.  Not 
only  coal,  but  every  kind  of  natural  inflammable  substance 
was  pressed  into  service,  and  made  to  do  duty  as  fuel  for 
the  subterranean  fires. 

It  was  also  obviously  needful  to  maintain  that  volcanoes 
must  be  comparatively  modern  phenomena.  We  are  told 
that  "it  was  only  after  the  deposition  of  the  immense 
repositories  of  inflammable  matter  in  the  Floetz-trap  that 
volcanoes  could  take  place  ;  they  are  therefore  to  be  con- 
sidered as  new  occurrences  in  the  history  of  nature.  The 
volcanic  state  appears  to  be  foreign  to  the  earth." 2 

The  similarity  of  basalt  to  many  undoubtedly  volcanic 
rocks  had  long  been  noticed,  and  could  not  escape  the 
observant  eyes  of  Werner.  But  he  did  not  therefore 
infer  basalt  to  be  of  volcanic  origin.  He,  had  already  estab- 
lished, as  one  of  the  indisputable  canons  of  geognosy, 
that  basalt  was  precipitated  from  chemical  solution  in 
a  universal  ocean.  The  way  in  which  he  accounted  for 
the  resemblance  between  basalt  and  lava  must  be  regarded 
as  a  signal  proof  of  his  ingenuity.  He  announced  that 
volcanoes  not  only  occur  where  there  are  seams  of  coal,  but 

1  See  the  paper  just  cited  in  Hopfner's  Magaz.  iv.  (1789),  p.  240. 
2  Jameson's  Geognosy,  p.  96. 


in  The  Wernerian  Theory  of  Basalt         125 

where  these  are  covered  by  sheets  of  basalt  and  wacke,  and 
that  eruptions  of  lava  take  place  when  these  overlying  rocks 
are  melted  by  the  combustion  of  the  coal.  He  thus  pro- 
vided himself  with  a  triumphant  answer  to  any  objector 
who  felt  inclined  to  question  his  dictum  as  to  the  origin  of 
basalt.  If  the  rock  occurred  on  isolated  hill  tops,  it  was  a 
member  of  the  Floetz-trap  formation  produced  by  universal 
chemical  precipitation.  If  it  was  found  in  the  condition 
of  lava,  the  original  precipitate  had  been  fused  by  the 
burning  of  underlying  seams  of  coal. 

With  so  flexible  a  theory  to  defend  and  apply,  it  can 
be  understood  how  the  pupils  of  the  Freiberg  school 
scouted  the  idea  that  volcanoes  were  of  any  real  geognosti- 
cal  importance,  and  how  they  had  a  ready  answer  to  any 
opponent,  or  a  prompt  explanation  of  any  apparent  diffi- 
culty in  the  acceptance  of  their  master's  teaching.  If  any 
one  claimed  that  basalt  was  of  volcanic  origin,  he  was  at 
once  confidently  assured  that  this  was  an  entire  mistake, 
for  the  great  law-giver  of  Freiberg  had  pronounced  it  to 
be  a  chemical  precipitate  from  water.  If  he  ventured  to 
quote  the  columnar  structure  as  in  favour  of  his  view,  he 
was  told  that  he  ought  to  know  that  lava  never  assumed 
this  structure,1  and  that  "  rocks  which  have  been  formed 
or  altered  by  the  action  of  heat  are  most  distinctly  different 
from  those  that  constitute  the  great  mass  of  the  crust  of 
the  globe." 2  If  he  brought  to  the  unabashed  Wernerian 
a  piece  of  obsidian,  and  asked  whether  such  a  rock  should 
not  be  admitted  to  be  a  volcanic  glass,  "  Nothing  of  the 
kind,"  would  have  been,  in  effect,  the  immediate  reply. 
"  It  is  true  that  the  rock  does  resemble '  completely  melted 

1  Jameson,  op.  cit.  p.  58.  2  Op.  tit.  p.  74. 


126  The  Founders  of  Geology 


LECT. 


stony  substances,  and  occurs  in  volcanic  countries/  but 
the  notion  that  it  is  itself  of  volcanic  origin  is  quite 
unfounded,  because  obsidian  has  never  been  observed 
accompanying  lava,  because  it  is  connected  with  basalt, 
and  because  it  contains  a  considerable  portion  of  water  of 
composition,  which  is  never  the  case  with  true  volcanic 
rocks." 1  If  the  questioner,  still  unconvinced,  ventured  to 
present  a  piece  of  pumice,  and  point  to  its  froth-like 
structure  and  its  presence  in  volcanic  countries  as  evidence 
of  its  former  fusion,  the  answer  would  have  been  an  equally 
prompt  and  decided  negative.  Let  me  quote  the  actual 
words  of  a  Wernerian  in  reply.  "  It  was  formerly  the 
general  opinion  that  pumice  was  a  volcanic  product,  be- 
cause it  frequently  occurs  in  countries  conjectured  to  be  of 
igneous  formation.  It  is  now  ascertained  to  be  an  aquatic 
product,  from  the  following  facts  :  1,  It  alternates  with 
Neptunian  rocks,  as  basalt  and  porphyry ;  2,  it  is  most 
distinctly  stratified  ;  3,  it  passes  into  obsidian  and  pearl- 
stone,  and  is  thus  connected  with  basalt,  pitchstone,  etc. ; 
4,  it  contains  water  of  composition,  which  is  never  the  case 
with  true  volcanic  rocks  ;  5,  it  has  never  been  observed  to 
flow  in  streams  from  the  crater  or  sides  of  a  volcano,  and 
no  one  ever  saw  it  forming  a  stream  in  countries  containing 
extinct  volcanoes." 2 

Well  might  the  inquirer  retire  in  despair  from  such  an 
encounter.  In  vain  would  he  have  sought  an  explanation 
of  the  origin  of  the  vesicular  structure  of  the  rock,  or 
have  asked  how  this  structure  could  ever  have  originated 
from  an  aqueous  solution.  He  would  probably  have  been 
plied  with  a  few  more  "  facts  "  of  equal  veracity,  and  a  few 

1  See  Jameson,  op.  cit.  p.  196.  2  Ibid. 


in  Werners  Explanation  of  Faults          127 

more  examples  of  reasoning  in  a  circle.  But  he  would 
never  succeed  in  extracting  an  expression  of  doubt,  or  an 
admission  that  the  ipse  dixit  of  the  Freiberg  professor 
could  for  a  moment  be  called  in  question. 

The  same  attitude  which  Werner  assumed  towards 
volcanoes  was  consistently  maintained  by  him  in  his 
treatment  of  the  proofs  of  disturbances  in  the  terrestrial 
crust.  He  seems  never  to  have  realized  that  any  reservoir 
of  energy  is  stored  up  in  the  interior  of  our  globe.  It  was 
part  of  his  teaching  that  the  spheroidal  form  of  the  planet 
furnished  one  of  the  proofs  of  a  primeval  universal  ocean. 
He  admitted  that  the  crust  had  been  abundantly  cracked, 
but  in  these  cracks  he  saw  no  evidence  of  any  subterranean 
action.  His  own  statement  of  his  views  on  this  subject  is 
sufficiently  explicit,  and  I  quote  his  words  :  "  When  the 
mass  of  materials  of  which  the  rocks  were  formed  by  pre- 
cipitation in  the  humid  way,  and  which  was  at  first  soft 
and  movable,  began  to  sink  and  dry,  fissures  must  of 
necessity  have  been  formed,  chiefly  in  those  places  where 
the  greatest  quantity  of  matter  has  been  heaped  up,  or 
where  the  accumulation  of  it  has  formed  those  elevations 
which  are  called  mountains."  *  He  gave  no  explanation 
of  the  reason  why  the  precipitates  of  his  universal  ocean 
should  have  gathered  more  thickly  on  one  part  of  the 
bottom  than  on  another.  It  was  enough  for  himself  and 
his  disciples  that  he  was  convinced  of  the  fact. 

As  all  rents  in  the  earth's  crust  were  thus  mere  super- 
ficial phenomena  resulting  from  desiccation  and  the  slip- 
ping down  of  material  from  the  sides  of  mountains,  so  it 
was  conceived  by  Werner  that,  when  they  were  filled  up, 

1  Theory  of  Veins,  §  39. 


128  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  mineral  matter  that  was  introduced  into  them  could 
only  come  from  above.  He  drew  no  distinction  in  this 
respect  between  what  are  now  called  "  mineral  veins  "  and 
"intrusive  veins."  Veins  of  granite,  of  basalt,  of  por- 
phyry, of  quartz,  of  galena,  or  of  pyrites  were  all  equally 
chemical  precipitates  from  an  overlying  sea.  He  does  not 
appear  to  have  seen  any  difficulty  in  understanding  how 
the  desiccation  and  rupture  of  the  rocks  were  to  take  place, 
if  the  sea  still  covered  them,  or  how,  if  they  were  exposed 
to  the  air  and  evaporation,  he  was  to  raise  the  level  of  the 
ocean  again  so  as  to  cover  them,  and  fill  up  their  rents 
with  new  precipitates. 

Werner's  original  scheme  of  classification  of  the  rocks 
of  the  earth's  crust  had  at  least  the  merit  of  clearness  and 
simplicity.  Though  he  borrowed  his  order  of  sequence 
partly  from  Lehmann  and  Fuchsel,  he  worked  it  into 
a  scheme  of  his  own  regarding  the  origin  of  the  rocks 
and  their  successive  production  from  a  universal  ocean. 
Tracing  in  the  arrangement  of  the  rocks  of  the  earth's 
crust  the  history  of  an  original  oceanic  envelope,  finding  in 
the  masses  of  granite,  gneiss,  and  mica- schist  the  earliest 
precipitations  from  that  ocean,  and  recognizing  the  suc- 
cessive alterations  in  the  constitution  of  the  water  as 
witnessed  by  the  series  of  geological  formations,  Werner 
launched  upon  the  world  a  bold  conception  which  might 
well  fascinate  many  a  listener  to  whom  the  laws  of 
chemistry  and  physics,  even  as  then  understood,  were  but 
little  known.  Unfortunately  the  conception  was  based 
entirely  on  the  imagination,  and  had  no  real  foundation 
in  observation  or  experiment. 

Werner  adopted  the  leading  ideas  of  his  system  in  an 


in          Precision  of  the  Wernerian  System        129 

early  part  of  his  career  when  his  personal  experience  was 
extremely  limited.  And  having  once  adopted  them,  he 
maintained  them  to  the  last.  His  methodical  mind 
demanded  some  hypothesis  that  would  allow  him  to 
group,  in  definite  and  genetic  connection,  all  the  facts 
then  known  regarding  the  structure  of  the  earth's  crust. 
His  first  sketch  of  a  classification  of  rocks  shows  by  its 
meagreness  how  slender  at  that  time  was  his  practical 
acquaintance  with  rocks  in  the  field.  The  whole  of  the 
Primitive  formations  enumerated  by  him  are  only  twelve 
in  number,  and  some  of  these  were  confessedly  rare.  As 
years  went  on,  he  intercalated  new  varieties,  introduced 
the  division  of  Transition  rocks,  and  was  compelled  to 
reduplicate  some  of  his  primitive  formations  by  having  to 
find  places  also  for  them  among  the  Floetz  series. 

Yet  with  all  these  shiftings  to  and  fro  the  apparent 
symmetry  and  conspicuous  method  of  the  system  were 
retained  to  the  end.  No  Saxon  mine  could  have  had  its 
successive  levels  more  regularly  planned  and  driven,  than 
the  crust  of  the  earth  was  parcelled  out  among  the  various 
Wernerian  universal  formations.  Each  of  these  had  its 
definite  chronological  place.  When  you  stood  on  granite, 
you  knew  you  were  at  the  base  and  root  of  all  things 
mundane.  When  you  looked  on  a  hill  of  Floetz-trap  you 
saw  before  you  a  relic  of  one  of  the  last  acts  of  precipita- 
tion of  the  ancient  universal  ocean. 

But  Nature  has  not  arranged  her  materials  with  the 
artificial  and  doctrinaire  precision  of  amineralogical  cabinet. 
Werner's  system  might  temporarily  suffice  for  the  little  part 
of  the  little  kingdom  of  Saxony  which,  when  he  promulgated 
his  views,  he  had  imperfectly  explored.  But  as  his  experi- 

K 


1 30  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

ence  widened  and  new  facts  accumulated,  the  modifications 
to  which  I  have  referred  were  so  serious  that  they  might 
well  make  the  author  of  the  system  pause,  and  raise  in  his 
mind  some  doubts  whether  the  fundamental  conception  on 
which  the  system  was  based  could  possibly  be  true.1  It 
was  eventually  found,  for  instance,  that  some  granite 
overlies  instead  of  underlying  the  slates  of  the  Primitive 
series  ;  that  some  greenstones,  instead  of  occurring  among 
the  Primitive  rocks,  lie  in  the  Floetz  division ;  that  there 
are  ever  so  many  horizons  for  porphyry,  which  was  at  first 
believed  to  be  entirely  Primitive.  These  contradictions 
were  surmounted  by  affixing  such  adjectives  as  "  oldest " 
or  "  newest "  to  the  several  appearances  of  the  same  rock, 
or  by  numbering  them  according  to  their  various  horizons. 
Thus  there  were  oldest  and  newest  granites,  oldest  and 
newer  serpentine,  and  first,  second,  and  third  porphyry 
formations. 

This  patching  up  of  the  system  may  have  saved  it  in 
appearance,  but  a  moment's  reflection  will  show  us  that 
it  was  fatal  to  Werner's  fundamental  doctrine  of  a  series 
of  successive  chemical  precipitates  from  a  universal  ocean, 
which  by  the  deposition  of  these  precipitates  was  gradu- 
ally altering  its  constitution.  The  modifications  rendered 
necessary  by  fresh  discovery  proved  that  the  supposed 
definite  sequence  did  not  exist.  In  fact,  as  was  well  said 
by  a  critic  at  the  time,  they  were  mere  "  subterfuges  'by 

1  D'Aubuisson,  a  loyal  and  favoured  pupil  of  Werner,  remarks  that 
"Werner  has  continued  from  year  to  year  to  modify,  and  even  to  recast, 
some  parts  of  his  doctrine,  while  his  disciples,  following  his  teaching,  in 
proportion  as  their  observations  have  multiplied,  have  added,  and  are 
continually  adding  new  improvements  to  his  system." — Traittdc,  G6og- 
nosie  (1819),  preface,  p.  xvi. 


in  Werner  s  Geological  Succession  131 

which  the  force  of  facts  was  evaded." *  They  were  devised 
for  the  purpose  of  bolstering  up  a  system  which  was  entirely 
artificial,  and  to  the  erroneousness  of  which  new  facts 
were  continually  bearing  witness. 

It  was  claimed  for  Werner  that  he  first  established  the 
doctrine  of  geological  succession  in  the  earth's  crust.  We 
have  seen  that  the  idea  was  already  supplied  to  him 
by  Lehmann  and  Fuchsel,  and  it  is  now  evident  that,  by 
working  into  it  his  notion  of  universal  aqueous  precipitates, 
he  introduced  an  element  of  hypothesis  which  threw  back 
for  some  years  the  progress  of  sound  geology.  What  was 
true  in  the  doctrine  was  borrowed  from  his  predecessors, 
what  was  his  own  consisted  largely  of  unwarranted  assump- 
tion. He  undoubtedly  did  enormous  service  by  his 
precise  definitions  and  descriptions  of  rocks,  and  by  dwell- 
ing on  the  fact  that  there  was  an  observable  order  of 
succession  among  them,  even  though  he  mistook  this  order 
in  some  important  particulars,  and  entirely  misinterpreted 
its  meaning  and  history.  The  full  significance  of  geolo- 
gical succession  was  not  understood  until  it  was  worked 
out  independently  in  England  and  France  by  a  rigid 
collection  of  facts,  as  I  shall  describe  in  a  later  lecture. 

It  was  the  exigencies  of  Saxon  mining  industry  that 
started  the  Mining  School  of  Freiberg.  The  teaching  there 
had  necessarily  constant  reference  to  the  underground 
operations  of  the  district.  Much  of  Werner's  practical 
acquaintance  with  the  relations  and  structure  of  rock- 
masses  was  derived  from  what  he  learnt  at  the  mines. 
It  was  only  natural,  therefore,  that  he  should  have  incul- 
cated upon  his  pupils  the  vast  importance  of  subterranean 

1  Edinburgh  Review,  vol.  xviii.  (1811),  p.  95. 


132  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

exploration  in  unravelling  the  structure  of  the  earth. 
The  devout  Wernerian  put  mines  before  mountains  as 
a  field  for  geological  investigation.1  Indeed  the  whole 
system  of  the  Freiberg  school,  with  its  limited  knowledge, 
its  partial  view  of  things,  its  dogmatism  and  its  bondage  to 
preconceived  theory,  is  suggestive  rather  of  the  dim  lamp- 
light and  confined  outlook  of  a  mine  than  of  constant 
and  unfettered  contact  with  the  fresh  and  open  face  of 
nature. 

These  characteristics  of  Werner's  teaching  were  keenly 
felt  by  some  of  the  more  clear-sighted  of  his  contem- 
poraries, who,  though  they  recognized  his  genius  and  the 
vast  services  he  had  rendered  to  mineralogy  by  solid 
achievement,  as  well  as  by  the  enthusiasm  he  had  excited 
in  many  hundreds  of  pupils,  yet  felt  that  in  regard  to 
geological  progress  his  influence  had  become  retrogressive 
and  obstructive.  This  judgment  was  forcibly  expressed 
in  the  article  which  appeared  in  the  Edinburgh  Eeview 
in  the  year  1811  from  which  I  have  already  quoted.  I 
have  reason  to  believe  that  this  article  was  from  the  pen 
of  Dr.  W.  H.  Fitton,  who  afterwards  became  one  of  the 
leaders  of  English  geology.  A  few  sentences  from  it  may 
find  a  fitting  place  on  the  present  occasion. 

"  The  Wernerian  school  obstructs  the  progress  of  dis- 
covery. The  manner  in  which  it  does  so  is  plain.  By 
supposing  the  order  already  fixed  and  determined  when 
it  is  really  not,  further  inquiry  is  prevented,  and  pro- 
positions are  taken  for  granted  on  the  strength  of  a 
theoretical  principle,  that  require  to  be  ascertained  by 
actual  observation.  It  has  happened  to  the  Wernerian 

1  See,  for  example,  Jameson,  op.  cit.  p.  43. 


in  Fitton  on  the  Wernerians  133 

system,  as  it  has  to  many  other  improvements ;  they  were 
at  first  inventions  of  great  utility;  but  being  carried 
beyond  the  point  to  which  truth  and  matter  of  fact  could 
bear  them  out,  they  have  become  obstructions  to  all 
further  advancement,  and  have  ended  with  retarding  the 
progress  which  they  began  with  accelerating.  This  is  so 
much  the  case  in  the  instance  before  us,  that  when  a 
Wernerian  geognost,  at  present,  enters  on  the  examination 
of  a  country,  he  is  chiefly  employed  in  placing  the  pheno- 
mena he  observes  in  the  situations  which  his  master  has 
assigned  to  them  in  his  plan  of  the  mineral  kingdom.  It 
is  not  so  much  to  describe  the  strata  as  they  are,  and  to 
compare  them  with  rocks  of  the  same  character  in  other 
countries,  as  to  decide  whether  they  belong  to  this  or  that 
series  of  depositions,  supposed  once  to  have  taken  place 
over  the  whole  earth;  whether,  for  example,  they  be  of 
the  Independent  Coal  or  the  Newest  Floetz-trap  formation, 
or  such  like.  Thus  it  is  to  ascertain  their  place  in  an 
ideal  world,  or  in  that  list  of  successive  formations  which 
have  nothing  but  the  most  hypothetical  existence  : — it  is 
to  this  object,  unfortunately  for  true  science,  that  the 
business  of  mineralogical  observation  has  of  late  been 
reduced." l 

Werner's  writings  are  so  few  and  slight  that  his  dis- 
ciples and  admirers  continually  expressed  their  sorrow 
that  he  would  leave  so  little  behind  him  save  his  world- 
wide fame.  His  natural  dislike  of  the  pen  increased  with 
his  years.  He  would  discourse  eloquently  on  many  subj  ects, 
but  could  never  bring  himself  to  write  fully  on  any  one. 
Usually  when  he  went  to  lecture  he  would  retire  for  a 

1  fflin.  Review,  vol.  xviii.  (1811),  art.  3,  pp.  96,  97. 


134  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

quarter  of  an  hour  to  arrange  his  ideas,  and  when  he 
appeared  before  his  audience  he  brought  with  him  only 
some  scraps  of  paper,  with  a  few  words  scribbled  on  them. 
He  never  wrote  a  single  lecture.  By  degrees  he  ceased 
to  write  letters,  even  when  the  dearest  friend  begged  for 
a  reply,  and  to  save  himself  from  the  reproach  of  this 
neglect,  he  came  at  last  never  to  open  the  letters  which 
he  received.  Cuvier  tells  how  once  an  author,  desiring  to 
consult  some  of  the  learned  men  of  the  day  concerning  a 
work  which  he  proposed  to  publish,  circulated  his  vol- 
uminous manuscript  among  them.  The  precious  parcel 
disappeared  in  the  circuit.  After  endless  seeking,  it  was 
disinterred  in  Werner's  room  from  underneath  some 
hundreds  of  others.  He  never  answered  the  Academy  of 
Sciences  of  Paris  when  it  conferred  on  him  the  very 
high  distinction  of  electing  him  one  of  its  eight  foreign 
associates,  and  he  might  never  have  heard  of  the  affair 
had  he  not  come  across  the  mention  of  it  in  some 
almanack.  "But,"  says  Cuvier,  "we  forgave  him  when 
we  heard  that  about  the  same  time  a  messenger  sent 
express  by  his  sister  from  Dresden  had  been  kept  waiting, 
at  the  professor's  expense,  for  two  months  for  a  mere 
signature  to  some  pressing  family  document." 

Werner's  life  passed  placidly  in  the  midst  of  the  work 
which  he  loved  and  the  pupils  and  friends  who  looked  up 
to  him  with  veneration  and  affection.  His  health  was 
never  robust,  and  the  effort  of  lecturing  proved  sometimes 
a  great  strain  upon  his  energy.  After  a  discourse  in 
which  he  would  pour  forth  his  ideas  with  the  full  flow  of 
his  exuberance,  the  bodily  and  mental  effort  would  be  so 
great  that  he  would  have  to  change  his  clothes  even  to  his 


in  Death  of  Werner  135 

inner  raiment.  He  tried  to  preserve  both  body  and  mind 
in  an  equable  frame.  Among  his  little  foibles  was  the 
care  he  took  never  to  expose  himself  to  a  draught.  He 
kept  himself  out  of  controversy,  and  eventually  refrained 
even  from  reading  the  journals,  and  from  knowing  what 
was  said  in  the  outer  world  about  himself  and  his  opinions. 
In  this  tranquil  life  he  might  perhaps  have  prolonged  his 
days,  had  not  his  feelings  been  deeply  stirred  by  the  mis- 
fortunes which,  during  the  Napoleonic  wars,  had  befallen 
Saxony,  his  adopted  home.  He  took  these  trials  so  much 
to  heart  that  they  led  to  a  series  of  internal  complications, 
from  which  he  died  at  Dresden,  in  the  arms  of  his  sister, 
on  30th  June  1817,  in  the  sixty-eighth  year  of  his  age. 

With  all  his  efforts  after  the  placid  life  of  a  philosopher, 
there  was  one  subject  that  not  unnaturally  stirred  Werner's 
wrath — the  unwarranted  publication,  or  at  least  circulation 
of  his  lectures  and  theories.  As  he  did  not  publish  them 
himself,  and  as  there  was  a  widespread  desire  to  become  ac- 
quainted with  them,  MS.  copies  of  notes  of  his  lectures  were 
widely  circulated,  as  a  kind  of  mercantile  speculation. 
This  was  bad  enough,  but  he  heard  of  an  intention  to 
print  and  publish  them.  So  he  took  an  opportunity  of 
cautioning  the  world  that,  while  willing  to  shut  his  eyes 
on  the  past,  he  could  not  tolerate  any  such  conduct  in 
future,  that  he  was  himself  engaged  in  revising  his  works 
on  the  several  branches  of  science  he  professed,  and  that 
they  would  "  forthwith  appear  one  after  another,  enriched 
by  his  latest  observations  and  discoveries."1  But  the 
revision  was  never  made,  and  the  publications  never 
appeared. 

1  New  Theory  of  the  Formation  of  Veins,  1791,  preface. 


136  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Whether  the  regrets  loudly  expressed  by  his  con- 
temporaries that  he  published  so  little  were  justified,  may 
perhaps  be  open  to  doubt.  If  Werner's  fame  had  rested 
on  his  written  works,  or  even  on  his  teaching  as  expounded 
by  his  pupils,  it  could  never  have  grown  so  great,  nor, 
judging  from  what  we  know  of  his  views  in  maturer  life, 
can  we  suppose  that  any  account  of  them  by  himself 
would  really  have  added  to  his  reputation,  or  have  con- 
tributed materially  to  the  advancement  of  science.  It 
was  not  his  writings,  nor  even  his  opinions  and  theories, 
that  gave  him  his  unquestioned  authority  among  the 
geologists  of  his  time.  His  influence  and  fame  sprang 
from  the  personality  of  the  man.  His  unwearied  enthu- 
siasm and  eager  zeal  in  the  furtherance  of  his  favourite 
studies,  his  kindness  and  helpfulness,  his  wide  range  of 
knowledge,  and  the  vivacity,  perspicuity,  and  eloquence 
with  which  he  communicated  it,  his  absolute  confidence 
in  the  solidity  of  his  theoretical  doctrines — these  were  the 
sources  of  his  power  rather  than  the  originality  and  import- 
ance of  his  own  contributions  to  geology.  His  followers, 
indeed,  captivated  by  the  precision  of  his  system  and  its 
apparent  applicability  in  any  and  every  country,  claimed 
for  him  the  highest  place  in  the  ranks  of  those  who  had 
studied  the  history  of  the  earth.  But  the  exaggeration  of 
their  claim  was  amply  shown  by  the  rapidity  with  which 
the  Wernerian  doctrines  began  to  fall  into  disrepute  even 
before  the  death  of  their  author. 

Among  the  permanent  effects  of  Werner's  teaching 
we  must  recognize  one  of  the  most  important  in  the  bias 
towards  the  mineralogical  and  petrographical  side  of 
geology  which  has  ever  since  distinguished  the  German 


in  Werner  s  Influence  137 

school.  His  theoretical  views,  however,  retarded  there  the 
acceptance  of  the  fuller  development  of  the  doctrine  of 
geological  succession  which  made  such  rapid  progress  even 
during  his  lifetime  in  England  and  in  France. 

But  unquestionably  the  greatest  service  which  Werner 
did  to  the  cause  of  geological  science  was  the  enthusiasm 
he  inspired  for  that  branch  of  knowledge  in  so  many 
capable  men.  "It  was  to  his  irresistible  influence,"  as 
Cuvier  has  well  remarked,  "that  the  world  owes  those 
authors  who  have  treated  so  fully  of  minerals,  and  those 
indefatigable  observers  who  have  so  fully  explored  the 
globe.  The  Karstens  and  the  Wiedemanns  in  the  cabinet, 
the  Humboldts,  the  Yon  Buchs,  the  D'Aubuissons,  the 
Hermanns,  the  Freieslebens,  at  the  summit  of  the 
Cordilleras,  in  the  midst  of  the  flames  of  Vesuvius  and  of 
Etna,  in  the  deserts  of  Siberia,  in  the  depths  of  the  mines 
of  Saxony,  of  Hungary,  of  Mexico,  of  Potosi,  have  been 
borne  onward  by  the  spirit  of  their  master ;  they  have 
brought  back  to  him  the  honour  gained  by  their  labours  ; 
and  we  may  say  of  him,  what  was  never  truthfully  said 
before,  save  of  Linnaeus,  that  Nature  everywhere  found 
herself  interrogated  in  his  name." 

It  was  one  of  the  most  singular  episodes  in  the 
history  of  geological  science  that  the  first  serious  check 
to  the  triumphal  march  of  Wernerianism  through  Europe 
came  from  two  of  Werner's  most  distinguished  pupils, 
D'Aubuisson  and  Von  Buch,  and  that  their  first  opposition 
to  their  master's  teaching  was  inspired  by  that  very 
volcanic  tract  in  Central  France  to  which  Desmarest  had 
so  long  before  appealed  in  vain.  Let  us  see  how,  in  this 
instance,  the  whirligig  of  time  brought  in  his  revenges. 


138  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Jean  Francois  D'Aubuisson  de  Voisins  (1*769-1819)  was 
born  in  the  south  of  France  on  16th  April  1769.  After 
receiving  his  early  education  in  his  own  country,  he  spent 
some  years  as  a  diligent  student  at  the  Mining  School  of 
Freiberg.  For  four  consecutive  years,  he  tells  us,  he  was 
in  the  most  favourable  circumstances  for  mastering  the 
Wernerian  doctrines,  inasmuch  as  the  illustrious  teacher 
honoured  him  with  particular  attention,  and  in  the  course 
of  many  conversations  unfolded  to  him  the  principles  of  his 
science,  and  traced  for  him  the  path  that  would  lead  him  to 
the  establishment  of  a  true  geognosy.1  While  still  pursuing 
his  studies  in  Saxony,  D'Aubuisson  took  up  the  question 
of  the  basalts  of  that  kingdom,  travelled  over  all  their 
scattered  hills,  and  at  last  wrote  a  treatise  upon  them, 
which  appeared  in  Paris  in  1803.  In  this  little  volume 
of  170  pages  the  Wernerian  doctrine  as  to  the  origin  of 
basalt  is  not  only  accepted  but  treated  as  if  it  were  incon- 
testable. In  one  passage,  indeed,  the  author  guards  him- 
self by  saying  that  his  conclusions  have  reference  only  to 
the  basalts  which  he  himself  has  seen,  and  that  if  some 
day  he  can  visit  Auvergne  and  the  Vivarais,  he  perhaps 
may  be  better  able  to  discuss  the  question  more  generally, 
and  to  appreciate  what  has  been  written  on  the  other  side.2 
His  essay  was  presented  to  the  Institute  of  Sciences,  and 
the  two  referees,  Haiiy  and  Eamond,  to  whom  it  was 
submitted,  appended  to  their  favourable  report  on  it  a 
most  judicious  piece  of  advice  to  the  young  author.  "  A 
subject,"  they  say,  "  where  the  analogies  already  hazarded 
have  led  to  more  than  one  mistake,  demands  the  utmost 

1  Traitdde  Gdognosie  (1819),  vol.  i.  preface,  p.  xv. 
2  M6moire  sur  Us  Basaltes  de  la  Saxe,  Paris  1803,  pp.  97,  100,  101. 


Ill 


D'Aubuisson  139 


caution  in  their  use,  and  in  a  field  which  the  two  parties 
dispute  foot  by  foot,  every  step  should  be  justified  by  an 
observation  and  marked  by  a  fact.  Citizen  D'Aubuisson 
has  never  seen  either  active  or  extinct  volcanoes.  Living 
till  now  in  the  midst  of  aqueous  formations,  we  should 
like  him  to  visit  places  where  fire  has  manifested  its 
empire.  We  would  especially  desire  that  he  should  see 
the  basalts  of  Auvergne,  which  another  disciple  of  Werner 
[Leopold  von  Buch]  has  just  visited.  That  the  citizen 
D'Aubuisson  knows  how  to  observe,  is  shown  by  his 
published  works,  even  if  the  memoir  we  have  now  been 
considering  were  not  ample  enough  proof,  and  the  interest 
of  his  observations  cannot  be  recognized  in  a  manner  more 
useful  to  science  than  by  encouraging  him  to  continue 
them." 

D'Aubuisson  lost  no  time  in  following  the  advice  thus 
given  to  him.  He  went  to  Auvergne  and  found  the 
basaltic  rocks  there  lying  on  granite,  which  in  some 
valleys  could  be  seen  to  be  more  than  1200  feet  thick. 
If  these  rocks  were  lavas,  they  must,  according  to  the 
Wernerian  doctrine,  have  resulted  from  the  combustion  of 
beds  of  coal.  But  how  could  coal  be  supposed  to  exist 
under  granite,  which  was  the  first  chemical  precipitate  of  a 
primeval  ocean  ?  Such  an  infra-position  was  inconceivable, 
and  thus  an  apparent  confirmation  of  the  Freiberg  view  of 
the  aqueous  origin  of  basalt  was  at  first  obtained.  But  a 
very  short  time  sufficed  to  stagger  the  young  geologist. 
He  saw  the  perfect  craters  with  their  rugged  lava-streams, 
which  he  followed  along  their  branches  into  the  valleys. 
It  was  impossible  to  resist  this  evidence.  "The  facts 
which  I  saw,"  he  says,  "  spoke  too  plainly  to  be  mistaken ; 


1 40  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  truth  revealed  itself  too  clearly  before  my  eyes,  so  that 
I  must  either  have  absolutely  refused  the  testimony  of  my 
senses  in  not  seeing  the  truth,  or  that  of  my  conscience  in 
not  straightway  making  it  known.  There  can  be  no 
question  that  basalts  of  volcanic  origin  occur  in  Auvergne 
and  the  Vivarais.  There  are  found  in  Saxony,  and  in 
basaltic  districts  generally,  masses  of  rock  with  an  exactly 
similar  groundmass,  which  enclose  exactly  and  exclu- 
sively the  same  crystals,  and  which  have  exactly  the  same 
structure  in  the  field.  There  is  not  merely  an  analogy,  but 
a  complete  similarity;  and  we  cannot  escape  from  the 
conclusion  that  there  has  also  been  an  entire  identity  in 
formation  and  origin." 1 

The  frank  and  courageous  Wernerian  read  his  recanta- 
tion before  the  Institute  of  France  the  year  after  his  work 
on  the  Saxon  basalts  appeared.2  Still  retaining  his  pro- 
found admiration  for  Werner,  he  nevertheless  relinquished 
one  after  another  the  peculiar  tenets  of  the  Freiberg  school, 
and  became  so  impartial  a  chronicler  of  geological  progress, 
that  in  his  remarkably  able  treatise  on  geology,  though  in- 
clining, on  the  whole,  to  his  master's  system,  he  did  not 
entirely  adopt  it,  but  presented  his  facts  and  inferences  in 
such  a  manner  that,  as  he  himself  claimed,  even  a  follower 

1  Gtognosie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  603,  605. 

2  "Sur  les  volcans  et  les  basaltes  de  TAuvergne,"  read  to  the  Institute 
of  Sciences  in  1804 ;  Journ.  de  Physique,  torn.  Iviii.  p.  427,  lix.  p.  367, 
Ixxxviii.  (1819),  p.  432  ;  Soc.  PUlom..  Bull.  Paris,  1804,  p.  182.     It  is  an 
indication   of  the  slowness  of  the   transmission   of   scientific  news  in 
those  days  that  in  the  English  translation  of  D'Aubuisson's  Basalts  of 
Saxony,  which  appeared  at  Edinburgh  in  1814 — that  is,  eleven  years  after 
the  original— the  translator  states  that  he  had  heard  of  the  author's  having 
modified  his  views  regarding  the  basalts  of  Auvergne,  but  that  he  was  not 
aware  that  he  had  expressed  any  change  of  opinion  in  respect  of  those  of 
Saxony. 


Ill 


Leopold  von  Buck  141 


of  Hutton  would  hardly  find  a  few  paragraphs  which  he 
would  wish  to  modify.  D'Aubuisson  lived  into  his  seventy- 
third  year,  and  died  in  1819. 

We  turn  now  to  the  story  of  Leopold  von  Buch  (1774- 
1853),  the  most  illustrious  geologist  that  Germany  has  pro- 
duced. He  came  of  a  good  family,  which  as  far  back  as  the 
twelfth  century  held  an  important  position  in  the  district  of 
Altmark.  His  father,  an  ambassador  in  the  Prussian  service, 
had  a  family  of  six  sons  and  seven  daughters.  Leopold, 
the  sixth  son,  born  on  25th  April  1774,  passed  through  a 
short  course  of  mineralogical  and  chemical  teaching  at 
Berlin,  and  then  went  to  Freiberg  at  the  age  of  sixteen,  to 
place  himself  under  the  guidance  of  Werner.  He  lived 
mostly  under  that  great  teacher's  roof  for  three  years, 
having  for  part  of  the  time  as  his  companion  Alexander 
von  Humboldt,  with  whom  he  then  began  a  lifelong  friend- 
ship. From  Freiberg,  where  he  drew  in  the  pure  Wernerian 
inspiration,  he  proceeded  to  the  University  of  Halle,  and 
later  to  that  of  Gottingen.  For  a  brief  period  he  held  an 
appointment  in  the  mining  department  of  Silesia,  but  he 
soon  abandoned  the  trammels  of  official  employment,  and 
having  a  sufficient  competence  for  life,  dedicated  himself 
heart  and  soul  to  independent  geological  research.  He  was 
by  far  the  most  eminent  of  all  the  band  of  active  propa- 
gandists who,  issuing  from  Freiberg,  spread  themselves 
over  Europe  to  illumine  the  benighted  natives  with  the 
true  light  of  Wernerianism. 

Von  Buch's  earlier  writings  were  conceived  after  the 
strictest  rules  of  his  master's  system.  In  his  first  separate 
work,  a  mineralogical  description  of  Landeck,  he  pro- 
claimed, among  other  orthodox  tenets  of  the  Freiberg 


142  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

school,  his  adhesion  to  the  aqueous  origin  of  basalt,  collected 
all  the  instances  he  could  find  of  organic  remains  in  that 
rock,  and  boldly  affirmed  that  "  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
Neptunism  opens  up  to  the  spirit  of  observation  a  far 
wider  field  than  does  the  volcanic  theory." 1 

In  the  year  1797  Von  Buch  had  his  first  view  of  the 
Alps,  and  in  the  following  year  began  his  more  distant 
journeys,  passing  into  Austria,  and  thence  into  Italy,  where 
he  spent  a  considerable  time  among  the  volcanic  districts. 
In  1802  he  published  the  first  of  two  volumes  descriptive 
of  these  early  travels.  It  was  appropriately  dedicated  to 
Werner,  and  expressed  his  continued  adhesion  to  the 
Wernerian  faith.  "  Every  country  and  every  district,"  he 
remarks,  "  where  basalt  is  found  furnishes  evidence  directly 
opposed  to  all  idea  that  this  remarkable  rock  has  been 
erupted  in  a  molten  condition,  or  still  more  that  each 
basalt  hill  marks  the  site  of  a  volcano."2  Before  the 
second  volume  appeared,  the  writer  of  that  sentence  had  an 
opportunity  of  visiting  Auvergne.  His  conversion  there 
appears  to  have  been  as  rapid  as  that  of  D'Aubuisson,  but 
his  announcement  of  it  was  much  more  sensational.  It 
was  in  the  spring  of  1802  that  he  went  to  Central  France, 
but  owing  to  various  accidents  the  second  volume  of  his 
travels  did  not  appear  until  the  year  1809.3  He  had  made 

1  Gesammelte  Schriften,  vol.  i.  p.  68. 

2  Geognostische  BeobacUungen  auf  Reisen  durch  Deutschland  und  Italian, 
Berlin,  i.  (1802),  p.  126.     It  is  a  curious  fact  that  A.  von  Humboldt  also 
began  his  geological  career  among  the  basalts  of  Germany,  and  published 
in  1790  a  little  tract  of  126  pages,  entitled  Mineralogische  BeobacUungen 
ubcr  einige  Basalte  am  Rhein. 

8  The  descriptions  of  Auvergne  are  contained  in  an  Appendix  to  vol.  ii., 
consisting  of  Mineralogische  Briefe  aus  Auvergne  an  Herrn  Geh.  Ober- 
Bergrath  Karsten,  p.  227  (1809). 


nr 


Von  Buck  143 


no  secret,  however,  of  his  change  of  opinion,  for  in  the 
winter  following  his  French  tour,  a  letter  from  him  was 
published,  recommending  a  geologist  who  wanted  to  see 
volcanoes  to  choose  Auvergne  rather  than  Vesuvius  or 
Etna.1  His  views  were  thus  well  known  to  Hauy  and 
Eamond  when  they  recommended  D'Aubuisson  to  betake 
himself  to  the  same  volcanic  region. 

When  his  fuller  account  of  his  rambles  in  Auvergne 
appeared,  its  very  first  sentence  betrayed  a  curious  ignor- 
ance or  forgetfulness  of  the  literature  of  the  subject. 
"  Here  we  are,"  he  says,  "  in  a  region  about  which  the 
naturalists  of  France  have  talked  so  much,  to  which  they 
have  persistently  referred  us,  but  which  they  have  never  yet 
described  to  us."  It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  Von  Buch 
had  never  seen  Desmarest's  papers  and  accompanying 
maps.  Yet  throughout  the  whole  account  which  he  gives 
of  his  excursions  he  does  not  once  refer  to  them,  but  writes 
as  if  he  were  almost  the  first  geologist  who  had  ever  made 
any  detailed  and  exact  observations  in  the  country.2 

Nothing  could  be  more  explicit  than  Von  Buch's  testi- 
mony to  the  volcanic  origin  of  the  basalts  of  Auvergne. 
The  marvellous  cone  and  crater  of  the  Puy  de  Pariou  excited, 
as  they  well  might,  his  astonishment  and  admiration. 

1  Journal  des  Mines,  vol.  xiii.  1802-1803,  p.  249.     Boue,  in  an  obituary 
notice  of  Von  Buch,  says  picturesquely  that  "in  the  year  1798  the  learned 
geognost  left  Germany  a  Neptunist  and  came  home  in  1800  a  Vulcanist." 
His  conversion,  though  as  complete,  was  not  quite  so  rapid,  for  even  after 
his  visit  to  Italy  and  Central  France,  though  he  gave  up  some  parts  of  the 
"Wernerian  system,  he  still  clung  tenaciously  to  others  which  he  after- 
wards abandoned. 

2  He  refers  indeed  several  times  to  Montlosier's  Essai  sur  Us  volcans  de 
V Auvergne,  which  he  calls  an  excellent  work.     In  one  passage  he  actually 
credits  this  author  with  some  of  the  most  important  generalizations  made 
by  Desmarest.     See  pp.  279,  280. 


1 44  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

"  Here,"  he  says,"  we  find  a  veritable  model  of  the  form 
and  degradation  of  a  volcano,  such  as  cannot  be  found  so 
clearly  either  at  Etna  or  Vesuvius.  Here  at  a  glance  we 
see  how  the  lava  has  opened  a  way  for  itself  at  the  foot  of 
the  volcano,  how  with  its  rough  surface  it  has  rushed  down 
to  the  lower  grounds,  how  the  cone  has  been  built  above  it 
out  of  loose  slags  which  the  volcano  has  ejected  from  its  large 
central  crater.  We  infer  all  this  also  at  Vesuvius,  but  we 
do  not  always  see  it  there  as  we  do  at  the  Puy  de  Pariou." * 

Perhaps  the  most  interesting  passages  in  Von  Buch's 
brightly-written  letters  are  to  be  found  at  the  end.  The 
obviously  volcanic  origin  of  the  rocks  in  Auvergne,  and 
their  position  immediately  above  a  mass  of  granite  through 
which  the  craters  had  been  opened,  had  evidently  power- 
fully impressed  his  mind.  With  all  these  recent  vivid 
experiences  he  reflects  upon  his  earlier  wanderings  among 
the  basalt  hills  of  Germany,  and,  as  if  taking  his  readers 
into  his  inner  confidence,  he  declares  that  "  it  is  impossible 
to  believe  in  a  particular  or  local  formation  of  basalt,  or  in 
its  flowing  out  as  lava,  when  we  know  what  the  relations 
of  this  rock  are  in  Germany,  and  when  we  remember  how 
many  different  kinds  of  rocks  are  there  associated  with 
basalt  as  essential  accompaniments,  how  these  rocks  form 
with  basalt  a  connected  whole  which  is  absolutely  incon- 
sistent with  any  notion  of  volcanic  action — a  peculiar  coal- 
formation,  entirely  distinct  from  any  other,  only  found 
with  basalt  and  entirely  enclosed  among  basaltic  rocks, 
often  even  a  peculiar  formation  of  limestone." 2 

This  was  the  one  side  of  the  picture.  He  could  not  yet 
break  entirely  the  Wernerian  bonds  that  held  him  to  the 
1  Op.  tit.  p.  240.  2  Op^  citf  p  309t 


in  Von  Bitch  in  Auvergne  145 

beliefs  he  had  imbibed  at  Freiberg.  He  could  not  bring 
himself  to  admit  that  all  that  his  master  had  taught  him 
as  to  the  origin  of  basalt,  all  that  he  had  himself  so  carefully 
noted  down  from  his  extended  journeys  in  Germany,  was 
radically  wrong.  He,  no  doubt,  felt  that  it  was  not  merely 
a  question  of  the  mode  of  origin  of  a  single  kind  of  stone. 
The  whole  doctrine  of  the  chemical  precipitation  of  the 
rocks  of  the  earth's  crust  was  at  stake.  If  he  surrendered 
it  at  one  point,  where  was  he  to  stop  ?  We  cannot  wonder, 
therefore,  that  he  still  refused  to  permit  himself  to  question 
the  truth  of  the  Wernerian  faith  in  so  far  as  the  old  basalts 
of  Saxony  and  Silesia  were  concerned.  He  comforted 
himself  with  the  belief  that  they  at  least,  with  all  their 
associated  sedimentary  strata,  must  have  been  deposited 
by  water. 

But  when  he  turns  round  again  to  the  clear  evidence 
displayed  in  Central  France,  he  asks,  "  Is  it  the  fault  of 
the  geologist  in  Auvergne  that  the  arguments  which  are 
powerful  in  Germany  have  no  effect  on  him  here,  even 
though  he  does  not  dispute  them  ?  May  he  not  be  allowed 
in  retort  to  ask  whether  the  principles  which  so  obviously 
arise  from  the  phenomena  in  Central  France  are  not  also 
applicable  to  the  German  basalts  ?  At  all  events,  he  may 
contend,  we  see  very  little  connection  between  these  basalts 
and  ours  as  regards  relations  of  structure.  Would  you 
have  us  give  up  our  convictions  as  to  the  principles  which 
give  grandeur,  consistency,  and  simplicity  to  the  explana- 
tion of  our  Auvergne  mountains,  and  adopt  views  founded 
on  relations  which  are  not  to  be  seen  here  ? " 1 

Well  might  Von  Buch  conclude  by  saying  that   he 

1  Op.  cit.  p.  310. 
L 


146  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

"  stands  perplexed  and  embarrassed."  Whatever  he  may 
think  of  the  basalts  of  Auvergne,  he  will  not  allow  the 
Vulcanist  to  wrest  his  admissions  to  any  general  conclusion 
with  regard  to  the  German  basalts.  "Opinions  are  in 
opposition  which  only  new  observations  can  remove." 

Von  Buch's  faith  in  the  Wernerian  interpretation  of 
volcanoes  and  basalt -hills  had  a  rude  shaking  from  his 
excursions  in  Italy  and  Central  France.  His  next  great 
journey  taught  him  that  Werner's  scheme  of  geological 
succession  could  not  be  maintained.  Before  his  volume 
descriptive  of  the  Italian  tour  was  published,  he  had 
started  for  Norway,  where  he  remained  hard  at  work  for 
no  less  than  two  years.  Among  the  vast  mass  of  import- 
ant observations  which  he  made,  one  that  must  have 
greatly  impressed  him  was  that  in  which  he  satisfied 
himself  that  the  rocks  in  the  Christiania  district  could 
not  be  arranged  according  to  the  Wernerian  plan.  His 
master's  scheme  of  succession  completely  broke  down. 
Von  Buch  found  a  mass  of  granite  lying  among  fossili- 
ferous  limestones  which  were  manifestly  metamorphosed, 
and  were  pierced  by  veins  of  granite,  porphyry,  and 
syenite.  Such  observations  did  not  lead  him,  any  more 
than  those  in  Central  France,  to  a  formal  renunciation  of 
Wernerianism.  But  they  enabled  him  to  take  a  wide  and 
independent  view  of  nature,  and  gradually  to  emancipate 
himself  from  the  narrower  views  in  which  he  had  been 
trained  at  Freiberg.1 

Von  Buch's  memorable  investigation  of  the  proofs  of 
the  recent  uprise  of  Scandinavia  contributed  still  further 

1  See  his  "  Reise  nach  Norwegen  und  Lappland,"  Gesammelte 
Schriften,  vol.  ii.  p.  109. 


in  Von  Buck's  Labours  147 

to  expand  his  geological  horizon.  When  he  announced 
that  the  whole  of  the  continent  of  Sweden  from  Frederik- 
shald  to  Abo  is  now  slowly  rising  above  the  sea,  he  did 
as  much  as  any  Vulcanist  of  his  day  in  support  of  the 
Huttonian  theory. 

A  further  emancipation  from  the  tenets  of  Freiberg  was 
displayed  by  a  series  of  papers  on  the  mountain-system  of 
Germany,  wherein  Von  Buch  gave  the  first  clear  description 
of  the  geological  structure  of  Central  Europe.  He  declared 
that  the  more  elevated  mountains  had  never  been  covered 
by  the  sea,  as  Werner  had  taught,  but  were  produced  by 
successive  ruptures  and  uplifts  of  the  terrestrial  crust. 
In  1824  he  produced  a  geological  map  of  the  whole  of 
Germany  in  forty- two  sheets,  the  first  large  map  of  its  kind 
to  illustrate  a  great  area  of  the  European  continent,  and  a 
signal  monument  of  its  author's  unwearied  research  and  of 
his  geological  acumen.  For  more  than  sixty  years  this  dis- 
tinguished man  continued  to  enrich  geological  literature 
with  memoirs  contributed  to  scientific  societies  and  journals, 
and  with  independent  works.  His  earliest  writings  stamped 
him  as  an  observer  of  great  sagacity  and  independence,  and 
his  reputation  rose  higher  every  year,  until  he  came  to  be 
the  acknowledged  leader  of  geological  science  in  Germany. 
Pressing  forward  into  every  department  of  the  science,  he 
illuminated  it  with  the  light  of  his  penetrating  intellect. 
From  the  North  Cape  to  the  Canary  Islands  there  was 
hardly  a  region  that  he  did  not  personally  explore,  and  not 
many  that  he  did  not  describe.  With  ceaseless  industry 
and  exhaustless  versatility,  he  ranged  from  the  structure 
of  the  Alps  to  that  of  the  Cystideans,  from  the  distribution 
of  volcanoes  to  that  of  Ammonites,  from  the  details  of 


148  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

minerals  and  rocks  to  the  deepest  problems  in  the  history 
of  the  globe.1 

His  influence  in  his  time  was  great.  Though  he  began 
as  a  Wernerian,  he  gradually  and  almost  unconsciously 
passed  into  the  ranks  of  the  vulcanists.  In  no  respect  did 
he  show  his  independence  and  love  of  truth  more  than  in 
his  long  and  enthusiastic  researches  among  volcanoes. 
No  Vulcanist  could  have  worked  out  more  successfully 
than  he  did  the  structure  and  history  of  the  Canary 
Islands. 

Among  the  leaders  of  geology  in  the  first  half  of  this 
century  there  was  no  figure  more  familiar  all  over  Europe 
than  that  of  Von  Buch.  Living  as  a  bachelor,  with  no 
ties  of  home  to  restrain  him,  he  would  start  off  from 
Berlin,  make  an  excursion  to  perhaps  a  distant  district  or 
foreign  country,  for  the  determination  of  some  geological 
point  that  interested  him,  and  return,  without  his  friends 
knowing  anything  of  his  movements.  He  made  most  of 
his  journeys  on  foot,  and  must  have  been  a  picturesque 
object  as  he  trudged  along,  stick  in  hand.  He  wore  knee- 
breeches  and  shoes,  and  the  huge  pockets  of  his  overcoat 
were  usually  crammed  with  note-books,  maps,  and  geolo- 
gical implements.  His  luggage,  even  when  he  came  as 
far  as  England,  consisted  only  of  a  small  baize  bag,  which 
held  a  clean  shirt  and  silk  stockings.  Few  would  have 
supposed  that  the  odd  personage  thus  accoutred  was  one 
of  the  greatest  men  of  science  of  his  time,  an  honoured 

1  Von  Buch's  collected  writings  form  four  large  closely-printed  octavo 
volumes.  The  Royal  Society's  Catalogue  assigns  153  separate  papers  to 
him.  For  a  biographical  account  of  Von  Buch  see  the  sketch  by  W. 
Haidinger  in  Jahrb.  k.  k.  geol.  Heichsanst.  Band  iv.  (1853),  p.  207,  and 
the  notices  prefixed  to  his  collected  works. 


in  Personal  Traits  of  Von  Buck  149 

and  welcome  guest  in  every  learned  society  of  Europe. 
He  was  not  only  familiar  with  the  writings  of  the  geologists 
of  his  day,  but  knew  the  men  personally,  visited  them  in 
their  own  countries,  and  with  many  of  them  kept  up  a 
friendly  and  lively  correspondence.  He  had  an  extensive 
knowledge  of  the  languages  of  Europe,  and  had  read  widely 
not  only  in  his  own  subjects,  but  in  allied  sciences,  in 
history,  and  in  literature,  ancient  and  modern.  Kindly, 
frank,  outspoken,  and  fearless,  he  was  beloved  and 
honoured  by  those  who  deserved  his  friendship,  and 
dreaded  by  those  who  did  not.  With  tender  self-sacrifice 
he  would  take  his  blind  brother  every  year  to  Carlsbad, 
and  with  endless  benefactions  did  he  brighten  the  lives  of 
many  who  survived  to  mourn  his  loss.  He  died  on  4th 
March  1853,  in  the  seventy-ninth  year  of  his  age.  A 
fitting  monument  to  his  memory  was  raised  by  sub- 
scriptions from  all  over  Europe.  In  the  picturesque 
region  of  Upper  Austria,  not  far  from  Steyer,  a  granite 
boulder  16  feet  high  that  had  been  borne  by  a  former  glacier 
from  the  Alps  was  chosen  as  his  cenotaph.  The  stone, 
chiselled  into  a  flat  surface,  bears  inscribed  upon  it,  with 
the  reverence  of  admirers  in  Germany,  Belgium,  France, 
England,  and  Italy,  the  immortal  name  of  Leopold  von 
Buch.1 

1  An  account  of  the  movement  for  the  preparation  of  this  monument 
will  be  found  in  Das  Buch-DenTcmal,  a  pamphlet  by  Ritter  von  Hauer  and 
D,r.  Homes,  published  in  Vienna  in  1858.  It  gives  a  portrait  of  Von 
Buch,  and  a  view  of  the  monument,  with  a  map  showing  the  position  of 
the  site. 


LECTUEE  IV 

Rise  of  the  modern  conception  of  the  theory  of  the  earth — Hutton,  Play- 
fair— Birth  of  experimental  geology— Sir  James  Hall. 

WHILE  the  din  of  geological  warfare  resounded  across 
Europe,  and  the  followers  of  Werner,  flaunting  the  Neptunist 
flag  in  every  corner  of  the  continent,  had  succeeded  in 
making  the  system  promulgated  from  Freiberg  almost 
supplant  every  other,  a  series  of  quiet  and  desultory 
researches  was  in  progress,  which  led  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  fundamental  principles  of  modern  geology. 
We  have  now  to  turn  our  eyes  to  the  British  Isles,  and  to 
trace  the  career  of  a  man  who,  with  singular  sagacity, 
recognizing  early  in  life  the  essential  processes  of  geological 
change,  devoted  himself  with  unwearied  application  to  the 
task  of  watching  their  effects  and  collecting  proofs  of  their 
operation,  and  who  combined  the  results  of  his  observations 
and  reasoning  in  a  work  which  will  ever  remain  one  of  the 
great  classics  of  science.  In  following  the  course  of  his 
researches,  we  shall  see  another  illustration  of  the  influence 
of  environment  on  mental  tendencies,  and  mark  how  the 
sea-shores  and  mountains,  glens  and  lowlands  of  Scotland 
have  given  tone  and  colour  to  the  development  of  geological 
theory. 

James  Hutton  (1726-1797)  was  born  in  Edinburgh  on 


LECT.  iv      Early  Career  of  James  Hutton  151 

the  3rd  June  1726,  and  was  educated  at  the  High  School 
and  University  of  that  city.1  His  father  was  a  worthy 
citizen  there,  who  had  held  the  office  of  City  Treasurer,  but 
died  while  the  son  was  still  very  young,  to  whom  he  left  a 
small  landed  property  in  Berwickshire.  While  attending 
the  logic  lectures  at  the  University,  Hutton's  attention  was 
arrested  by  a  reference  to  the  fact  that,  although  a  single  acid 
suffices  to  dissolve  the  baser  metals,  two  acids  must  combine 
their  strength  to  effect  the  solution  of  gold.  The  professor, 
who  had  only  used  this  illustration  in  unfolding  some 
general  doctrine,  may  or  may  not  have  made  his  pupil  a 
good  logician,  but  he  certainly  made  him  a  chemist,  for  from 
that  time  the  young  student  was  drawn  to  chemistry  by  a 
force  that  only  became  stronger  as  years  went  on.  When 
at  seventeen  years  of  age  he  had  to  select  his  profession  in 
life,  he  was  placed  as  an  apprentice  in  a  lawyer's  office. 
But  genius  is  irrepressible,  and  amid  the  drudgery  of  the 
law  the  young  clerk's  chemistry  not  infrequently  came  to 
the  surface.  He  would  be  found  amusing  himself  and  his 
fellow-  apprentices  with  chemical  experiments,  when  he 
should  have  been  copying  papers  or  studying  legal  pro- 
ceedings, so  that  finally  his  master,  seeing  that  law  was 
evidently  not  his  bent,  released  him  from  his  engage- 
ment, and  advised  him  to  seek  some  other  employment 
more  suited  to  his  turn  of  mind. 

Hutton  accordingly,  after  a  year's  drudgery  at  law, 
made  choice  of  medicine  as  the  profession  most  nearly 

1  For  the  biographical  details  in  this  sketch  I  am  indebted  to  the 
admirable  "Biographical  Account  of  Dr.  James  Hutton"  by  his  friend 
and  illustrator,  Playfair.  This  was  first  printed  in  the  Transactions  of 
the  Royal  Society  of  Edinburgh,  and  will  be  found  in  vol.  iv.  of  Playfair's 
collected  works. 


152  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

allied  to  chemistry,  and  most  likely  to  allow  him  to  indulge 
his  predilection  for  science.  For  three  years  he  prosecuted 
his  medical  studies  at  Edinburgh,  and  thereafter,  as  was 
then  the  custom,  repaired  to  the  continent  to  complete  his 
professional  training.  He  remained  nearly  two  years  in 
Paris,  pursuing  there  with  ardour  the  studies  of  chemistry 
and  anatomy.  Eeturning  to  Scotland  by  way  of  the  Low 
Countries,  he  took  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Medicine  at 
Ley  den  in  September  1749. 

But  the  career  of  a  physician  seems  to  have  grown  less 
attractive  to  him  as  the  time  came  on  for  his  definitely 
settling  in  life.  He  may  have  been  to  some  extent  influ- 
enced by  the  success  of  certain  chemical  researches  which 
he  had  years  before  begun  with  a  friend  of  kindred  tastes 
— researches  which  had  led  to  some  valuable  discoveries  in 
connection  with  the  nature  and  production  of  sal  ammo- 
niac, and  which  appeared  to  offer  a  reasonable  prospect  of 
commercial  success.  In  the  end  he  abandoned  all  thought 
of  practising  as  a  medical  man,  and  resolved  to  apply  him- 
self to  farming.  He  was  a  man  never  disposed  to  do 
things  by  halves,  and  having  made  up  his  mind  in  favour 
of  agriculture  as  his  vocation,  he  determined  to  take  ad- 
vantage of  the  best  practical  instruction  in  the  subject 
then  available.  Accordingly  in  1*752  he  betook  himself 
to  Norfolk,  lived  with  a  Norfolk  farmer,  and  entered  with 
all  the  zest  of  a  young  man  of  six-and-twenty  into  the 
rural  sports  and  little  adventures  which,  in  the  intervals 
of  labour,  formed  the  amusement  of  his  host  and  his 
neighbours. 

It  appears  to  have  been  during  this  sojourn  in  East 
Auglia  that  Hutton's  mind  first  definitely  turned  to 


IV 


Hiitton  as  Farmer  153 


mineralogy  and  geology.  He  made  many  journeys  on 
foot  into  different  parts  of  England.  In  Norfolk  itself 
there  was  much  to  interest  his  attention.  Every  here 
and  there,  the  underlying  white  chalk  came  to  the  surface, 
with  its  rows  of  fantastically -shaped  black  flints.  To 
the  east,  lay  the  Crag  with  its  heaps  of  sea-shells,  stretch- 
ing over  many  miles  of  the  interior.  To  the  north,  the 
sea  had  cut  a  range  of  cliffs  in  the  boulder-clay  which, 
with  its  masses  of  chalk  and  its  foreign  stones,  presented 
endless  puzzles  to  an  inquirer.  To  the  west,  the  shores 
of  the  Wash  showed  the  well-marked  strata  of  red  chalk 
and  carstone,  emerging  from  underneath  the  white  chalk 
of  the  interior. 

Hutton  tells,  in  one  of  his  letters  written  from  Norfolk, 
that  he  had  grown  fond  of  studying  the  surface  of  the 
earth,  and  was  looking  with  anxious  curiosity  into  every 
pit  or  ditch  or  bed  of  a  river  that  fell  in  his  way. 

After  spending  about  two  years  in  Norfolk,  he  took  a 
tour  into  Flanders,  with  the  view  of  comparing  the  hus- 
bandry there  with  that  which  he  had  been  studying  in 
England.  But  his  eyes  were  now  turned  to  what  lay 
beneath  the  crops  and  their  soils,  and  he  took  note  of  the 
rocks  and  minerals  of  the  districts  through  which  he 
passed.  At  last,  about  the  end  of  the  summer  of  1754,  he 
settled  down  on  his  own  paternal  acres  in  Berwickshire, 
which  he  cultivated  after  the  most  approved  methods. 
For  fourteen  years  he  remained  immersed  in  rural  pursuits, 
coming  occasionally  to  Edinburgh  and  making,  from  time 
to  time,  an  excursion  to  some  more  distant  part  of  the 
kingdom.  His  neighbours  in  the  country  probably  looked 
upon  him  only  as  a  good  farmer,  with  more  intelligence, 


154  The  Foimders  of  Geology  LECT. 

culture  and  knowledge  of  the  world  than  were  usual  in 
their  society,  and  displaying  a  playful  humour  and  liveli- 
ness of  manner  which  must  have  made  his  companionship 
extremely  pleasant.  Probably  not  one  of  the  lairds  and 
farmers  in  the  South  of  Scotland,  who  met  him  at  kirk 
and  market,  had  the  least  suspicion  that  this  agreeable 
neighbour  of  theirs  was  a  man  of  surpassing  genius,  who  at 
that  very  time,  amidst  all  the  rural  pursuits  in  which  he 
seemed  to  be  absorbed,  was  meditating  on  some  of  the 
profoundest  problems  in  the  history  of  the  earth,  and  was 
gathering  materials  for  such  a  solution  of  these  problems 
as  had  never  before  been  attempted. 

The  sal  ammoniac  manufacture  had  proved  successful, 
and  from  1765  Hutton  became  a  regular  co-partner  in  it. 
His  farm,  now  brought  into  excellent  order,  no  longer 
afforded  him  the  same  interest  and  occupation,  and  eventu- 
ally he  availed  himself  of  an  opportunity  of  letting  it  to 
advantage.  He  determined  about  the  year  1768  to  give 
up  a  country  life  and  establish  himself  in  Edinburgh  in 
order  that,  with  uninterrupted  leisure,  he  might  devote 
himself  entirely  to  scientific  pursuits. 

The  Scottish  capital  had  not  yet  begun  seriously  to 
suffer  from  the  centripetal  attractions  of  London.  It 
was  the  social  centre  of  Scotland,  and  retained  within  its 
walls  most  of  the  culture  and  intellect  of  that  ancient 
kingdom.  Hutton,  from  his  early  and  close  connec- 
tion with  Edinburgh,  had  many  friends  there,  and,  on 
his  return  for  permanent  residence,  was  received  at  once 
into  the  choicest  society  of  the  town.  One  of  his  most 
intimate  associates  was  Dr.  Joseph  Black,  the  famous 
chemist  to  whom  we  owe  the  discovery  of  carbonic  acid. 


iv  Huttoris  Associates  in  Edinburgh         155 

This  sympathetic  friend  took  the  keenest  interest  in 
Button's  geological  theories,  and  was  able  to  contribute  to 
their  formation  and  development.  Hutton  himself  ac- 
knowledges that  one  of  his  doctrines,  that  of  the  influence*^ 
of  compression  in  modifying  the  action  of  heat,  was 
suggested  by  the  researches  of  Dr.  Black.  The  chemist's 
calm  judgment  and  extensive  knowledge  were  always  at 
the  command  of  his  more  impulsive  geological  friend,  and 
doubtless  proved  of  essential  service  in  guiding  him  in  his 
speculations. 

Another  of  Button's  constant  and  intimate  associates 
was  John  Clerk  of  Eldin,  best  known  as  the  author  of  a 
work  on  naval  tactics,  and  the  inventor  of  the  method  of 
breaking  the  enemy's  line  at  sea.  which  led  to  so  many 
victories  by  the  fleets  of  Great  Britain.  A  third  member 
of  his  social  circle,  who  may  be  alluded  to  here,  was  the 
philosopher  and  historian  Adam  Ferguson,  a  man  of 
remarkable  force  of  character,  who,  to  his  various  literary 
works,  which  were  translated  into  French  and  German, 
added  the  distinction  of  a  diplomatist,  for  in  IVVS-IVTO  he 
acted  as  Secretary  of  the  Commission  sent  across  the 
Atlantic  by  Lord  North  to  try  to  arrange  the  matters 
in  dispute  between  the  mother  country  and  her  North 
American  colonies. 

When  Hutton  found  himself  in  these  congenial  sur- 
roundings, with  ample  leisure  at  his  command,  he  appears 
to  have  turned  at  once  to  his  first  love  in  science,  by 
betaking  himself  to  chemical  experiment.  Even  without 
the  testimony  of  his  biographer,  we  have  only  to  look  at 
his  published  works  to  be  impressed  by  his  unwearied 
industry,  and  by  the  extraordinarily  wide  range  of  his 


156  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

studies.  Though  up  to  the  time  of  his  settling  in  Edin- 
burgh he  had  published  nothing,  he  had  read  extensively. 
There  were  hardly  any  of  the  sciences,  except  the  mathe- 
matical, to  which  he  did  not  turn  his  attention.  He  was 
a  diligent  reader  of  voyages,  travels  and  books  of  natural 
history,  carefully  storing  up  the  facts  which  seemed  to 
him  to  bear  on  the  problems  of  the  earth's  history.  He 
not  only  prosecuted  chemistry  and  mineralogy,  but  dis- 
tinguished himself  as  a  practical  meteorologist  by  his 
important  contribution  to  the  theory  of  rain.  He  wrote  a 
general  system  of  physics  and  metaphysics  in  one  quarto 
volume,  and  no  fewer  than  three  massive  quartos  were 
devoted  by  him  to  "  An  Investigation  of  the  Principles  of 
Knowledge,  and  of  the  Progress  of  Keason  from  Sense 
to  Science  and  Philosophy."  At  the  time  of  his  death 
he  was  engaged  upon  a  treatise  on  the  "Elements  of 
Agriculture." 

Hutton  was  thus  no  narrow  specialist,  wrapped  up  in 
the  pursuit  of  one  circumscribed  section  of  human  inquiry. 
His  mind  ranged  far  and  wide  over  all  departments  of 
knowledge.  He  took  the  keenest  interest  in  them  all,  and 
showed  the  most  vivid  sympathy  in  their  advancement. 
His  pleasure  in  every  onward  step  made  by  science  and 
philosophy  showed  itself  in  the  most  lively  demonstra- 
tions. "He  would  rejoice,"  we  are  told  by  Playfair, 
"over  Watt's  improvements  on  the  steam-engine,  or 
Cook's  discoveries  in  the  South  Seas,  with  all  the  warmth 
of  a  man  who  was  to  share  in  the  honour  or  the  profit 
about  to  accrue  from  them.  The  fire  of  his  expression, 
on  such  occasions,  and  the  animation  of  his  countenance 
and  manner,  are  not  to  be  described;  they  were  always 


iv  Hutton  in  Edinburgh  157 

seen  with  great  delight  by  those  who  could  enter  into  his 
sentiments ;  and  often  with  great  astonishment  by  those 
who  could  not." 

While  so  much  was  congenial  to  his  mental  habits  in 
the  friendly  intercourse  of  Edinburgh  society,  there  was 
not  less  in  the  scenery  around  the  city  that  would  stimu- 
late his  geological  proclivities.  He  could  not  take  a  walk 
in  any  direction  without  meeting  with  illustrations  of 
some  of  the  problems  for  the  solution  of  which  he  was 
seeking.  If  he  turned  eastward,  Arthur  Seat  and  Salis- 
bury Crags  rose  in  front  of  him,  with  their  memorials  of 
ancient  volcanic  eruptions.  If  he  strolled  westward,  the 
ravines  of  the  Water  of  Leith  presented  him  with  proofs  of 
the  erosive  power  of  running  water,  and  with  sections  of 
the  successive  sea -bottoms  of  the  Carboniferous  period. 
Even  within  the  walls  of  the  city,  the  precipitous  Castle 
Rock  bore  witness  to  the  energy  with  which  in  ancient 
times  molten  material  had  been  thrust  into  the  crust  of 
the  earth. 

No  more  admirable  environment  could  possibly  have 
inspired  a  geologist  than  that  in  which  Hutton  now  began 
to  work  more  sedulously  at  the  study  of  the  former 
changes  of  the  earth's  surface.  But  he  went  far  afield  in 
search  of  facts,  and  to  test  his  interpretation  of  them.  He 
made  many  journeys  into  different  parts  of  Scotland, 
where  the  phenomena  which  engaged  his  attention  seemed 
most  likely  to  be  well  displayed.  He  extended  his  ex- 
cursions likewise  into  England  and  Wales.  For  about 
thirty  years,  he  had  never  ceased  to  study  the  natural 
history  of  the  globe,  constantly  seeking  to  recognize  the 
proofs  of  ancient  terrestrial  revolutions,  and  to  learn  by 


158  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

what  causes  they  had  been  produced.  He  had  been  led  to 
form  a  definite  theory  or  system  which,  by  uniting  and 
connecting  the  scattered  facts,  furnished  an  intelligible 
explanation  of  them.  But  he  refrained  from  publishing  it 
to  the  world.  He  had  communicated  his  views  to  one  or 
two  of  his  friends,  perhaps  only  to  Dr.  Black  and  Mr. 
Clerk,  whose  judgment  and  approval  were  warmly  given 
to  him.  The  world,  however,  might  have  had  still  a  long 
time  to  wait  for  the  appearance  of  his  dissertation,  had  it 
not  been  for  the  interest  that  he  took  in  the  foundation  of 
the  Koyal  Society  of  Edinburgh,  which  was  incorporated 
by  Koyal  Charter  in  1783. 1  At  one  of  the  early  meetings 

1  The  Royal  Society  had  been  preceded  by  the  Philosophical  Society, 
out  of  which  it  sprang.  Edinburgh  at  that  time  was  famous  for  the 
number  of  its  clubs  and  convivial  meetings,  at  some  of  which  Black  and 
Hutton  were  constant  companions.  Various  anecdotes  have  been  handed 
down  of  these  two  worthies  and  their  intercourse,  of  which  the  following 
may  suffice  as  a  specimen.  "These  attached  friends  agreed  in  their 
opposition  to  the  usual  vulgar  prejudices,  and  frequently  discoursed 
together  upon  the  absurdity  of  many  generally  received  opinions,  especially 
in  regard  to  diet.  On  one  occasion  they  had  a  disquisition  upon  the 
inconsistency  of  abstaining  from  feeding  on  the  testaceous  creatures  of  the 
land,  while  those  of  the  sea  were  considered  as  delicacies.  Snails,  for 
instance — why  not  use  them  as  articles  of  food  ?  They  were  well  known 
to  be  nutritious  and  wholesome — even  sanative  in  some  cases.  The 
epicures,  in  olden  time,  esteemed  as  a  most  delicious  treat  the  snails  fed 
in  the  marble  quarries  of  Lucca.  The  Italians  still  hold  them  in  esteem. 
The  two  philosophers,  perfectly  satisfied  that  their  countrymen  were 
acting  most  absurdly  in  not  making  snails  an  ordinary  article  of  food, 
resolved  themselves  to  set  an  example  ;  and  accordingly,  having  procured 
a  number,  caused  them  to  be  stewed  for  dinner.  No  guests  were  invited 
to  the  banquet.  The  snails  were  in  due  season  served  up ;  but,  alas  ! 
great  is  the  difference  between  theory  and  practice — so  far  from  exciting 
the  appetite,  the  smoking  dish  acted  in  a  diametrically  opposite  manner, 
and  neither  party  felt  much  inclination  to  partake  of  its  contents.  Never- 
theless, if  they  looked  on  the  snails  with  disgust,  they  retained  their  awe 
for  each  other  ;  so  that  each  conceiving  the  symptoms  of  internal  revolt 
peculiar  to  himself,  began  with  infinite  exertion  to  swallow  in  very  small 
quantities  the  mess  which  he  internally  loathed.  Dr.  Black  at  length 


iv         Hutton  on  the  Earth's  Internal  Heat     159 

of  this  Society  he  communicated  a  concise  account  of  his 
Theory  of  the  Earth,  which  appeared  in  the  first  volume  of 
the  Transactions.  This  essay  was  afterwards  expanded, 
with  much  ampler  details  of  observations  and  fuller 
application  of  principles  to  the  elucidation  of  the  pheno- 
mena, and  the  enlarged  work  appeared  in  two  octavo 
volumes  in  the  year  1*795  with  the  title  of  Theory  of 
the  Earth,  with  Proofs  and  Illustrations.  After  Button's 
death  his  friend  Playfair  published  in  1802  his  classical 
Illustrations  of  the  Huttonian  Theory.  We  are  thus  in 
possession  of  ample  information  of  the  theoretical  views 
adopted  by  Hutton,  and  of  the  facts  on  which  he  based 
them.  Before  considering  these,  however,  it  may  be 
convenient  to  follow  the  recorded  incidents  of  his  quiet 
and  uneventful  life,  that  we  may  the  better  understand 
the  manner  in  which  he  worked,  and  the  nature  of  the 
material  by  which  he  tested  and  supported  his  conclusions. 

It  was  one  of  tb£^fimdamental_doctrines  of  Button's   \£ 
system  thatlK^aternal  heat  of  the  globe  has  in  past  time     ' 
shown    its  vigour   by  the  intrusion   of  large   masses   of 
molten  material  into  the  crust!     He  foundTmany  examples 
of  these  operations  on  a  small  scale  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Edinburgh  and  in  the  lowlands  of  Scotland.      But  he 
conceived  that  the  same  effects  had  been  produced  in  a  far 
more  colossal  manner  by  the  protrusion  of  large  bodies  of 
granite.      This  rock,  which  Werner  had  so  dogmatically 

broke  the  ice,  but  in  a  delicate  manner,  as  if  to  sound  the  opinion  of  his 
messmate,  '  Doctor,  do  you  not  think  that  they  taste  a  little— a  very 

little — queer  ? '     *  D queer,  d queer,  indeed  ;  tak  them  awa',  tak 

them  awa'  ! '  vociferated  Dr.  Hutton,  starting  up  from  table  and 
giving  full  vent  to  his  feelings  of  abhorrence." — A  Series  of  Original 
Portraits,  by  John  Kay  (commonly  known  as  Kay's  Edinburgh 
Portraits],  vol.  i.  p.  57. 


1 60  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

affirmed  to  be  the  earliest  chemical  precipitate  from  his 
primeval  ocean,  was  surmised  by  Hutton  to  be  of  igneous 
origin,  and  he  believed  that,  if  its  junctions  with  the 
surrounding  strata  were  examined,  they  would  be  found  to 
furnish  proofs  of  the  correctness  of  his  inference.  The 
question  could  be  easily  tested  in  Scotland,  where,  both  in 
the  Highlands  and  among  the  Southern  Uplands,  large 
bodies  of  granite  had  long  been  known  to  form  important 
groups  of  mountains.  Accordingly,  during  a  series  of 
years,  Hutton  undertook  a  number  of  excursions  into 
various  parts  of  his  native  country,  and  returned  from  each 
of  them  laden  with  fresh  illustrations  of  the  truth  of  the 
conclusions  at  which  he  had  arrived.  At  one  time  he  was 
busy  among  the  roots  of  the  Grampian  Hills,  at  another 
he  was  to  be  seen  scouring  the  lonely  moorlands  of  Gallo- 
way, or  climbing  the  precipices  and  glens  of  Arran.  His 
visit  to  Glen  Tilt  has  been  made  memorable  by  Playfair's 
brief  account  of  it.1  He  had  conjectured  that  in  the  bed 
of  the  river  Tilt  actual  demonstration  might  be  found  that 
the  Highland  granite  has  disrupted  the  surrounding 
schists.  Playfair  describes  how  "  no  less  than  six  large 
veins  of  red  granite  were  seen  in  the  course  of  a  mile, 
traversing  the  black  micaceous  schistus,  and  producing,  by 
the  contrast  of  colour,  an  effect  that  might  be  striking  even 
to  an  unskilful  observer.  The  sight  of  objects  which 
verified  at  once  so  many  important  conclusions  in  his 
system,  filled  him  with  delight ;  and  as  his  feelings,  on 
such  occasions,  were  always  strongly  expressed,  the  guides 
who  accompanied  him  were  convinced  that  it  must  be 
nothing  less  than  the  discovery  of  a  vein  of  silver  or  gold 

1  Button's  account  is  in  the  unpublished  third  volume  of  his  Theory. 


iv  Hutton  verifies  his  Theories  161 

that  could  call  forth  such  strong  marks  of  joy  and 
exultation." 

Another  of  Button's  fundamental  generalizations  was 
tested  in  as  vivid  and  successful  a  manner.  He  taught 
that  the  T*niriaj^n_pflTl^r  world  In.y  frpfneath  the  secondary 
strata,  and  that  where  the  base  of  these_strata  can  be  seen, 
it  will  beTound  to~reveal,  by  what  is  now  known  as  an 
unconformability]^ 

at  various  points  in  Scotland  satisfied  himself  by  actual 
observation  that  this  relation  holds  good.  But  he  deter- 
mined to  verify  it  once  more  by  examining  the  junction  of 
the  two  groups  of  rock  along  the  coast  where  the  range  of 
the  Lammermuir  Hills  plunges  into  the  sea.  Accompanied 
by  his  friend  Sir  James  Hall,  whose  property  of  Dunglass 
lay  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood,  and  by  his  colleague 
and  future  biographer  Playfair,  and  favoured  by  calm 
weather,  he  boated  along  these  picturesque  shores  until  the 
unconformable  junction  was  reached.  The  vertical  Silurian 
shales  and  grits  were  found  to  protrude  through  and  to  be 
wrapped  round  by  the  red  sandstone  and  breccia.  "  Dr. 
Hutton,"  Playfair  writes,  "  was  highly  pleased  with  ap- 
pearances that  set  in  so  clear  a  light  the  different  formations 
of  the  parts  which  compose  the  exterior  crust  of  the  earth, 
and  where  all  the  circumstances  were  combined  that  could 
render  the  observation  satisfactory  and  precise.  On  us 
who  saw  these  phenomena  for  the  first  time,  the  impression 
made  will  not  easily  be  forgotten.  The  palpable  evidence 
presented  to  us  of  one  of  the  most  extraordinary  and 
important  facts  in  the  natural  history  of  the  earth,  gave 
a  reality  and  substance  to  those  theoretical  speculations 
which,  however  probable,  had  never  till  now  been  directly 

M 


1 62  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

authenticated  by  the  testimony  of  the  senses.  We  often 
said  to  ourselves,  what  clearer  evidence  could  we  have  had 
of  the  different  formation  of  these  rocks,  and  of  the  long 
interval  which  separated  their  formation,  had  we  actually 
seen  them  emerging  from  the  bosom  of  the  deep?  .  .  . 
The  mind  seemed  to  grow  giddy  by  looking  so  far  into 
the  abyss  of  time;  and  while  we  listened  with  earnest- 
ness and  admiration  to  the  philosopher  who  was  now 
unfolding  to  us  the  order  and  series  of  these  wonderful 
events,  we  became  sensible  how  much  further  reason  may 
sometimes  go  than  imagination  can  venture  to  follow." 

Hutton's  lithe  active  body  betokened  the  unwearied 
vigour  of  his  mind.  His  high  forehead,  firmly  moulded 
features,  keen  observant  eyes,  and  well-shaped,  rather 
aquiline  nose,  marked  him  out  at  once  as  a  man  of  strong 
intellect,  while  the  gentleness  that  beamed  in  his  face  was 
a  reflex  of  the  kindliness  of  his  nature.  His  plain  dress, 
all  of  one  colour,  gave  a  further  indication  of  the  unostenta- 
tious simplicity  of  his  nature. 

His  mode  of  life  was  in  harmonious  keeping  with  these 
personal  traits.  After  working  in  his  study  during  the  day 
he  would  invariably  pass  the  evening  with  his  friends.  "  A 
brighter  tint  of  gaiety  and  cheerfulness  spread  itself  over 
every  countenance  when  the  doctor  entered  the  room  ;  and 
the  philosopher  who  had  just  descended  from  the  sublimest 
speculations  of  metaphysics  or  risen  from  the  deepest 
researches  of  geology,  seated  himself  at  the  tea-table,  as 
much  disengaged  from  thought,  as  cheerful  and  gay,  as 
the  youngest  of  the  company."  His  character  was  distin- 
guished by  its  transparent  simplicity,  its  frank  openness,  its 
absence  of  all  that  was  little  or  selfish,  and  its  overflowing 


iv  Huttoris  "Theory  of  the  Earth"         163 

enthusiasm  and  vivacity.  In  a  company  he  was  always 
one  of  the  most  animated  speakers,  his  conversation  full  of 
ingenious  and  original  observation,  showing  wide  infor- 
mation, from  which  an  excellent  memory  enabled  him  to 
draw  endless  illustrations  of  any  subject  that  might  be 
discussed,  where,  "  when  the  subject  admitted  of  it,  the 
witty  and  the  ludicrous  never  failed  to  occupy  a  consider- 
able place." 

Though  his  partnership  in  the  chemical  work  brought 
him  considerable  wealth,  it  made  no  difference  in  the  quiet 
unostentatious  life  of  a  philosopher,  which  he  had  led 
ever  since  he  settled  in  Edinburgh.  A  severe  attack  of 
illness  in  the  summer  of  1*793  greatly  reduced  his  strength, 
and  though  he  recovered  from  it  and  was  able  to  resume 
his  life  of  activity,  a  second  attack  of  the  same  ailment 
in  the  winter  of  1796  ^terminated  at  last  fatally  on  the 
26th  March  1797,  when  he  was  in  his  seventy-first  year. 

Hutton's  claim  to  rank  high  among  the  founders  of 
geology  rests  on  no  wide  series  of  writings,  like  those  which 
Von  Buch  poured  forth  so  copiously  for  more  than  two 
generations.  Nor  was  it  proclaimed  by  a  host  of  devoted 
pupils,  like  those  who  spread  abroad  the  fame  of  Werner. 
It  is  based  on  one  single  work,1  and  on  the  elucidations  of 
two  friends  and  disciples. 

On  the  7th  of  March  and  4th  of  April  1785  there  was 
read  to  the  Eoyal  Society  of  Edinburgh  a  memoir  on  a 
"  Theory  of  the  Earth ;  or  an  Investigation  of  the  Laws 
observable  in  the  Composition,  Dissolution,  and  Eestoration 
of  Land  upon  the  Globe."  Extending  to  no  more  than  96 

1  The  first  sketch  and  the  expansion  of  it  into  two  volumes  may  be  practi- 
cally regarded  as  one  work  so  far  as  the  originality  of  conception  is  concerned. 


1 64  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

quarto  pages,  it  was  written  in  a  quiet  logical  manner,  with 
no  attempt  at  display,  but  with  an  apparent  anxiety  to 
state  the  author's  opinions  as  tersely  as  possible.  Probably 
no  man  realized  then  that  this  essay  would  afterwards  be 
regarded  as  marking  a  turning-point  in  the  history  of 
geology.  For  some  years  it  remained  without  attracting 
notice  either  from  friend  or  foe.1 

For  this  neglect  various  causes  have  been  assigned. 
The  title  of  the  memoir  was  perhaps  unfortunate.  The 
words  "  Theory  of  the  Earth  "  suggested  another  repetition 
of  the  endless  speculations  as  to  the  origin  of  things,  of 
which  men  had  grown  weary.  System  after  system  of  this 
kind  of  speculation  had  been  proposed,  and  had  dropped 
into  oblivion,  and  no  doubt  many  of  his  contemporaries 
believed  Button's  "Theory"  to  be  one  of  the  same  ill- 
fated  brood.  His  friend  Playfair  admits  that  there  were 
reasons  in  the  construction  of  the  memoir  itself  why  it 
should  not  have  made  its  way  more  speedily  into  notice. 
Its  contents  were  too  condensed,  and  contained  too  little 
explanation  of  the  grounds  of  the  reasoning.  Its  style  was 
apt  to  be  prolix  and  obscure.  It  appeared  too  in  the 
Transactions  of  a  learned  Society  which  had  only  recently 
been  founded,  and  whose  publications  were  hardly  yet 
known  to  the  general  world  of  science. 

1  It  does  not  appear  to  be  generally  known  that  Desmarest,  departing 
from  his  usual  practice  of  not  noticing  the  work  of  living  writers,  wrote  a 
long  and  careful  notice  of  Button's  Memoir  of  1785  in  the  first  volume  of 
his  Gtographie  Physique,  published  in  1794-1795.  He  disagrees  with  many 
of  Button's  views,  such,  for  instance,  as  that  of  the  igneous  origin  of 
granite.  But  he  generously  insists  on  the  value  of  the  observations  with 
which  the  Scottish  writer  had  enriched  the  natural  history  of  the  earth 
and  the  physical  geography  of  Scotland.  "It  is  to  Scotland,"  he  says, 
"that  Button's  opponents  must  go  to  amend  his  results  and  substitute 
for  them  a  more  rational  explanation  "  (p.  750). 


iv  Hutton,  De  Luc  and  Kirwan  165 

At  last,  after  an  interval  of  some  five  years,  De  Luc 
assailed  the  "  Theory  "  in  a  series  of  letters  in  the  Monthly 
Review  for  1790  and  1791.  So  far  as  we  know,  Hutton 
published  no  immediate  reply  to  these  attacks.  He  had 
often  been  urged  by  his  friends  to  publish  his  entire  work 
on  the  Theory  of  the  Earth,  with  all  the  proofs  and  illus- 
trations which  had  been  accumulating  in  his  hands  for  so 
many  years.  From  year  to  year,  however,  he  delayed  the 
task,  until  during  the  convalescence  from  his  first  severe 
illness,  he  received  a  copy  of  a  strenuous  attack  upon  his 
system  and  its  tendencies  by  Eichard  Kirwan,  a  well- 
known  Irish  chemist  and  mineralogist  of  that  day.1  This 
assailant  not  only  misconceived  and  misrepresented  the 
views  which  he  criticized,  but  charged  their  author  with 
atheistic  opinions.  "Weakened  as  he  was  by  illness, 
Hutton,  with  characteristic  energy,  the  very  day  after  he 
received  Kirwan's  paper,  began  the  revisal  of  his  manu- 
script, and  worked  at  it  until  he  was  able  to  send  it  to  the 
press.  It  appeared  in  1795,  that  is,  ten  years  after  the 
first  sketch  of  the  subject  was  given  to  the  Eoyal  Society 
of  Edinburgh.  Besides  embodying  that  sketch,  it  gave  a 
much  fuller  statement  of  his  views,  and  an  ampler  presenta- 
tion of  the  facts  and  observations  on  which  they  were 
founded.  It  formed  two  octavo  volumes.  Playfair  tells 
us  that  a  third  volume,  necessary  for  the  completion  of  the 
work,  remained  in  manuscript.2 

1  "Examination  of  the  Supposed  Origin  of  Stony  Substances,"  read  to 
the  Royal  Irish  Academy,  3rd  February  1793,  and  published  in  vol.  v.  of 
their  Transactions,  p.  51.      For  a  crushing  exposure  of  Kirwan's  mode 
of  attack  see  Play  fair's  Illustrations  of  the  Huttonian  Theory,  §§  119, 
418. 

2  A  portion  of  this  manuscript,  containing  six  chapters  (iv.-ix.),  is  in 


1 66  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

If  Button's  original  sketch  was  defective  in  style  and 
arrangement,  his  larger  work  was  even  more  unfortunate 
in  these  respects.  Its  prolixity  deterred  readers  from  its 
perusal.  Yet  it  was  a  vast  storehouse  of  accurate  observa- 
tion and  luminous  deduction,  and  it  deserves  to  be  care- 
fully studied  by  every  geologist  who  wishes  to  understand 
the  history  of  his  own  science. 

Fortunately  for  Hutton's  fame,  he  numbered  among  his 
friends  the  illustrious  mathematician  and  natural  philoso- 
pher, John  Playfair  (1748-1819),  who  had  been  closely  as- 
sociated with  him  in  his  later  years,  and  was  intimately  con- 
versant with  his  geological  opinions.  Gifted  with  a  clear 
penetrating  mind,  a  rare  faculty  of  orderly  logical  arrange- 
ment, and  an  English  style  of  altogether  remarkable  preci- 
sion and  elegance,  he  was  of  all  men  best  fitted  to  let  the 
world  know  what  it  owed  to  Hutton.  Accordingly,  after 
his  friend's  death  he  determined  to  prepare  a  more  popular 
and  perspicuous  account  of  Hutton's  labours.  He  gave  in 
this  work,  first  a  clear  statement  of  the  essential  principles 
of  Hutton's  system,  and  then  a  series  of  notes  or  essays 
upon  different  parts  of  the  system,  combining  in  these  a 
large  amount  of  original  observation  and  reflection  of  his 
own.  His  volume  appeared  in  the  spring  of  1802,  just 
five  years  after  Hutton's  death,  with  the  title  of  Illustra- 
tions of  the  Huttonian  Theory  of  the  Earth.  Of  this  great 
classic  it  is  impossible  to  speak  too  highly.  After  the 
lapse  of  nearly  a  century  it  may  be  read  with  as  much 
profit  and  pleasure  as  when  it  first  appeared.  For  preci- 

the  possession  of  the  Geological  Society  of  London,  but  the  rest  seems  to 
have  disappeared.  It  is  much  to  be  desired  that  this  precious  fragment 
should  be  published. 


iv  Hutt on  s  Fundamental  Doctrines          167 

sion  of  statement  and  felicity  of  language  it  has  no  superior 
in  English  scientific  literature.  To  its  early  inspiration  I 
owe  a  debt  which  I  can  never  fully  repay.  Upon  every 
young  student  of  geology  I  would  impress  the  advantage 
of  reading  and  re-reading  and  reading  yet  again  this  con- 
summate masterpiece.  How  different  would  geological 
literature  be  to-day  if  men  had  tried  to  think  and  write 
like  Playfair ! 

There  are   thus    three  sources  of   information    as    to  I 
Hutton's  geological  system — his  first  sketch  of  1785,  his  | 
two  octavo  volumes  of  1795  and  Playfair's  Illustrations  of 
1802.     Let  us  now  consider  what  were  his  fundamental 
doctrines. 

Although  he  called  his  system  a  Theory  of  the  Earth, 
Hutton's  conceptions  entirely  differed  from  those  of  the 
older  cosmologists,  who  thought  themselves  bound  to  begin 
by  explaining  the  origin  of  things,  and  who  proceeded  on 
a  foundation  of  hypothesis  to  erect  a  more  or  less  fantastic 
edifice  of  mere  speculation.  tHe,  on  the  contrary,  believed 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  science  to  begin  by  ascertaining  what 
evidence  there  is  in  the  earth  itself  to  throw  light  upon  ' 
its  history.  Instead  of  invoking  conjecture  and  hypo- 
thesis,  he  proceeded  from  the  very  outset  to  collect  the 
actual  facts,  and  to  marshal  these  in  such  a  way  as  to 
make  them  tell  their  own  storj?/  Unlike  Werner,  he  had 
no  preconceived  theory  about  the  origin  of  rocks,  with 
which  all  the  phenomena  of  nature  had  to  be  made  to 
agree.  His  theory  grew  so  naturally  out  of  his  observa- 
tions that  it  involved  no  speculation  in  regard  to  a  large 
part  of  its  subject. 

Hutton  started  with  the  grand  conception  that  the  past 


1 68  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

history  of  our  globe  must  be  explained  by  what  can  be 
seen  to  be  happening  now,  or  to  have  happened  only 
recently.  The  dominant  idea  in  his  philosophy  is  that 
resent  is  the  key  to  the  past}!)  We  have  grown  so 
familiar  withthis  idea,  it  enters  somtimately  into  all  our 
conceptions  in  regard  to  geological  questions,  that  we  do 
not  readily  realize  the  genius  of  the  man  who  first  grasped 
it  with  unerring  insight,  and  made  it  the  chief  corner-stone 
of  modern  geology. 

From  the  time  of  his  youthful  rambles  in  Norfolk, 
Hutton  had  been  struck  with  the  universal  proofs  that 
the  surface  of  the  earth  has  not  always  been  as  it  is 
to-day.  Everywhere  below  the  covering  of  soil  he  found 
evidence  of  former  conditions,  entirely  unlike  those 
visible  now.  In  the  great  majority  of  cases,  he  noticed 
that  the  rocks  there  to  be  seen  consist  of  strata,  disposed 
in  orderly  arrangement  parallel  with  each  other.  Some 
of  these  strata  are  formed  of  pudding-stone,  others  of  sand- 
stone, of  shale,  of  limestone,  and  so  forth,  differing  in 
many  respects  from  each  other,  but  agreeing  in  one  essential 
character,  that  they  are  composed  of  fragmentary  or  detrital 
material,  derived  from  rocks  older  than  themselves.  He 
saw  that  these  various  strata  could  be  exactly  paralleled 
among  the  accumulations  now  taking  place  under  the  sea. 
The  pudding-stones  were  in  his  eyes  only  compacted 
gravels,  the  sandstones  were  indurated  sand,  the  lime- 
stones were  in  great  part  derived  from  the  accumulation 
of  the  remains  of  marine  calcareous  organisms,  the  shales 
from  the  consolidation  of  mud  and  silt.  The  wide  extent 
of  these  strata,  forming,  as  they  do,  most  of  the  dry  land, 
seemed  to  him  to  point  to  the  sea  as  the  only  large 


IV 


Huttoris  Doctrines  169 


expanse   of  water   in  which   they  could   have  been  de- 
posited. 

i  Thus  the  first  conclusion  established  by  the  Scottish 
philosopher  was  that  the  greater  part  of  the  land  con- 
sisted of  compacted  sediment  which  had^been  worn  away 
from  some  pre-existing  continent,  and  had_Jbeen  spread 
out  in  strata  over  the  bed  of  the  sea.  He  realized  that 
the  rocks  thus  formed  were  not  all  of  the  same  age,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  bore  witness  to  a  succession  of  revolu-- 
tions.  He  acknowledged  the  existence  of  a  series  of 
ancient  rocks  which  he  called  Primary,  not  that  he  believed 
them  to  be  the  original  or  first-formed  rocks  in  the  struc- 
ture of  the  planet,  but  that  they  were  the  oldest  that  had 
then  been  discovered  They  included  the  various  schists 
and  slates  which  Werner  claimed  as  chemical  precipitates, 
but  in  which  Hutton  could  only  see  the  hardened  and 
altered  mechanical  sediments  of  a  former  ocean.  ^Above 
them,  and  partly  formed  out  of  them,  came  the  Secondary 
strata  that  constitute  the  greater  part  of  the  land.] 

But  all  these  sedimentary  deposits  have  passed  from 
their  original  soft  condition  into  that  of  solid  stone. 
Hutton  attributed  this  change  to  the  auction  of  subterranean 
heat  In  his  day  the  chemistry  of  geology  was  exceed- 
ingly imperfect.  The  solubility  of  silica,  for  instance,  and 
its  capacity  for  being  introduced  in  solution  into  the 
minutest  crevices  and  pores  of  a  rock  were  not  known. 
It  need  not,  therefore,  surprise  us  to  find  that  in  the 
Huttonian  conception  the  flints  in  chalk  were  injected 
into  the  rock  in  a  molten  state,  and  that  the  agate  of  fossil 
wood  bore  marks  of  igneous  fusion.  iHutton  did  not  realize 
to  what  an  extent  mere  compression  could  solidify  the 


1 70  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

materials  of  sedimentary  strata,  nor  how  much  may  be 
done  by  infiltration  and  deposition  between  the  clastic 
grains.  But  there  was  one  effect  of  compression  which, 
though  not  perhaps  at  first  sight  obvious,  was  clearly 
perceived  by  him  in  its  geological  relations.  He  saw  that 
the  influence i_.pf  ..keatjipon^ocks  must  be  largely  modified 

Ibj^pressure.^  The  more  volatile  components,  which  would 
speedily  be  driven  off  by  a  high  temperature  at  the  surface, 
may  be  retained  under  great  pressure  below  that  surface. 
Hutton  conceived  that  limestone  might  even  be  fused  in 
this  way,  and  yet  still  keep  its  carbonic  acid.  This  idea 
was  ridiculed  at  the  time,  but  its  truth  was  confirmed 
afterwards  by  Hall's  experiments,  to  which  I  shall  allude 
in  a  later  part  of  this  lecture. 

The   next  step  in    his   reasoning  was    that   whereby 
^      Hutton  sought  to  account  for  the  present  position  of  the 
\jr1t  sjra^a  which,  originally__depositeor"under  the  sea,  are  now 
found  even  on  mountain  crests.15,000  feet  above. -seaJevel. 
{We  have  seen  how  Werner  looked  on  his  vertical  primitive 
strata  as  having  been  precipitated  from  solution  in  that 
position,  and  as  having  been  uncovered  by  the  gradual 
subsidence    and    disappearance    of   the    water.      Hutton 
attacked  the  problem  in  a  very  different  fashion.     He  saw 
that  if  the  exposure  of  the  drjj^jj?yftrftdnp.  merelytojhe 
_the__sea,  jt_would  involve  no  change  in  the 
nf  thp.  at.rfl.fa.  rp.]  ^jy  ftJjH-nAa  p.h  other.    What  were 
first  deposited  should  lie  at  the  bottom,  what  were  last 
deposited  at  the  top ;  and  the  whole  should  retain  their 
original  flatness. 

But  the  most  cursory  examination  was,  in  his  opinion, 
sufficient  to  show  that  the  actual   conditions  in  nature 


IV 


Huttoris  Doctrines  1 7 1 


were  entirely  different  from  any  such  arrangement.  Where- 
ever  he  went,  he  found  proofs  that  the  sedimentary  strata 
now  forming  most  of  the  land  had  generally  lost__tjie 
horizontal  position  in  which  they  were  accumulated.  He 
saw  them  usually  inclined,  sometimes  placed  on,  end,  or 
even  stupendously  contorted  and  ruptured.  It  was  mani- 
festly absurd,  as  De  Saussure  had  shown  in  the  Alps,  to 
suppose  that  the  pebbles  in  vertical  beds  of  conglomerate 
could  ever  have  been  deposited  in  such  positions.  \  And  %if 
some  of  the  vertical  strata  could  thus  be  demonstrated  to 
have  been  originally  horizontal,  there  could  be  no  reason  for 
refusing  to  concede  that  the  same  alteration  had  happened 
to  the  other  vertical  strata,  even  though  they  did  not  supply 
such  convincing  proofs'of  it.  No  stratum  could  have  ended 
off  abruptly  at  the  time  of  its  formation,  nor  could  it  have 
been  accumulated  in  plicated  layers.  But  nothing  is  more 
common  than  to  find  strata  presenting  their  truncated 
ends  to  the  sky,  while  in  some  districts  they  are  folded  and 
wrinkled,  like  irregular  piles  of  carpets.  Not  only  so,  but 
again  and  again  they  are  found  to  be  sharply  dislocated, 
so  that  two  totally  different  series  are  placed  parallel  to 
each  other. 

Hutton  recognized  that  these  changes,  which  were 
probably  brought  about  at  different  periods,  must  be 
attributed  to  some  great  convulsions  which,  from  time  to 

could  prove  that,  in  some  places,  the  Primary  rocks  had  in 
this  way  been  broken  up  and  placed  on  end  before  the 
Secondary  series  was  laid  down,  for,  as  on  the  Berwickshire 
coast,  he  had  traced  the  older  vertical  strata  overlain  and 
wrapped  round  by  the  younger  horizontal  deposits,  and 


172  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

had  also  observed,  from  the  well-worn  fragments  of  the 
former  enclosed  in  the  latter,  that  the  interval  of  time 
represented  by  the  break  between  them  must  have  been  of 
considerable  duration. 

Having,  by  this  admirable  train  of  observation  and 
deduction,  been  led  to  the  demonstration  of  former  gigantic 
disturbances,  by  which  the  bed  of  the  sea  had  been  up- 
heaved and  its  hardened  sediments  had  been  tilted,  plicated 
and  fractured,  to  form  the  existing  dry  land,  Hutton  had 
next  to  look  round  for  some  probable  cause  for  these  pheno- 
mena. He  inferred  that  the  convulsions  could  only  have 
been  produced  by  some  force  that  acted  from  below  up- 
ward, but  was  so  combined  with  the  gravity  and  resistance 
of  the  mass  to  which  it  was  applied,  as  to  create  a  lateral 
and  oblique  thrust  that  gave  rise  to  the  contortions  of  the 
strata.  He  did^  not  pretend  to  be  able^tp_explain  the 
nature  and  operation  of  thi^^ubterranean  force.  He 
believe^TtEal  it  waif  essentially  due  to  heat±  and  he  con- 
nected with  it  thejDperations  of  volcanoes,  which  he  re- 
garded as  general  overthe  gloBi§7and  as  "  spiracles  to  the 
subterranean  furnace  in  order  to  prevent  the  unnecessary 
elevation  of  land,  and  fatal  effects  of  earthquakes." 1 

Unlike  Werner,  Hutton  recognized  the  fundamental 
importance  of  the  internal  high  temperature^of  the  globe, 
of  which  volcanoes  are  one  of  the  proofs.  (He  saw  that  no 
mere  combustion  of  substances  could  account  for  this  tem- 
perature, which  arose  from  causes  so  far  different  from 
ordinary  combustion,  that  it  might  require  no  circulation 
of  air  and  no  supply  of  combustible  materials  to  support 
it.  The  nucleus  of  the  globe  might  accordingly  "be  a 

1  Theory  of  the  Earth,  vol.  i.  p.  146. 


iv  Huttori s  Views  of  Igneous  Rocks         173 

fluid   mass,   melted,   but    unchanged    by  the    action   of 
heat." 

In   this  way,  appealing  at  every  step  to  the   actual   • 
facts   of  nature,  Hutton  built  up  the   first  part   of  his  j 
immortal  Theory.     Most  of  these  facts  were  more  or  less  j 
familiar  to  men ;  and  some  of  the  obvious  inferences  to  be 
drawn  from  them  had  been  noted  by  several  observers! 
before  his  time.     But  no  one  until  then  had  grouped  themj 
into  a  coherent  system  by  which  the  earth  became,  as 
it  were,  her  own  interpreter.     The  very  obviousness  and 
familiarity   of  the   doctrine   at   the  present  time,  when 
it   is   the  groundwork   of    modern    geology,   are   apt  to 
blind    us    to   the    genius    of    the    man   who   first   con- 
ceived it,  and  worked  it  into  a  harmonious  and  luminous 
whole. 

In  the  course  of  his  journeys  in  Scotland,  Hutton  had 
come  upon  manyexamples  of  rocka.  JihaJLwere  not  stratified. 
Some  of  these  occurred  among  the  Primary  masses  ;  others 
were  observable  in  the  Secondary  series.  Eeflecting  deeply 
on  the  probable  reaction  of  the  heated  interior  of  the  globe 
uponits  outer  cooler^  shelter  crust,  he  had  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  many,  if  not  all,  of  these  unstratified  rocks 
were  to  be  regarded  as  material  that  had  once  been  in  a/71 
molten  condition,  and hadbeen injected  from  below duringvfe/ 
some  of  the  great  c-npvnlsinps  indicated  by  the  disturbed 
strata.  He  distinguished  three  principal  kinds  of  such 
mtru^iye^  rocks  -^"whinstone,"  under  which  term  he 
included  a  miscellaneous  series  of  dark,  heavy,  somewhat 
basic  rocks,  now  known  as  dolerites,  basalts,  diabases  and 
andesites ;  porphyry,  which  probably  comprised  such  rocks 
as  felsite,  orthophyre  and  quartz-porphyry ;  and  granite, 


1 74  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

which,  though  generally  used  in  its  modem  sense,  em- 
braced some  rocks  of  more  basic  character. 

He  showed  that  the  whinstones  correspond  so  closely 
to  modern  lavas  in  structure  and  composition,  that  they 
may  be  regarded  as  probably  also  of  volcanic  origin.     But 
he  did  not  suppose  that  they  had  actually  been  erupted  at 
the  surface,  like  streams  of  lava.    He  found  them  to  occur 
sometimes  in  vertical  veins,  known  in  Scotland  as  dykes — 
a  term  now  universal  in  English  geological  literature — and 
sometimes   as   irregular  bosses,  or  interposed   as   sheets 
between  the  strata.     He  regarded  these  rocks  as  masses  of 
subterranean  or  unerupted  lava,  but  the  grounds  on  which 
he  reached  this  conclusion  were  not  always  such  as  the 
subsequent  progress  of  inquiry  has  justified.    The  deduction 
was  correct,  but  the  reasoning  that  led  up  to  it  was  partly 
fallacious.    Hutton  argued,  for  instance,  that  the  carbonate 
of  lime,  so   commonly  observable   in   his   "whinstones," 
indicated  that  the  rock  had  been  fused  deep  within  the 
earth,  under  such  pressure  as  to  keep  that  mineral  in  a 
molten  state,  without  the  loss  of  its  carbonic  acid.     Like 
the  other  mineralogists  of  his  day,  he  was  not  aware  that 
the  calcite  of  the  amygdales  has  been  subsequently  intro- 
duced in  solution,  and  that  the  diffused  calcite  in  the  body 
of  the  rocks  generally  results  from  their  decomposition  by 
infiltrating  water.  Much  more  appropriate  were  his  observa- 
tions that  the  whinstone  has  greatly  indurated  the  strata 
into  which  it  has  been  injected,  even  involving  fragments 
of  them,  and  reducing  carbonaceous  substances,  such  as 
coal,  to  the  condition  of  coke  or  charcoal ;  that  it  has  been 
inserted  among  the  strata  with  such  violence  as  to  shift, 
upraise,  bend,  or  otherwise  disturb  them,  and  that  it  can 


IV 


Hutton  on  Granite  175 


be  seen  to  have  come  in  abruptly  in  one  continuous  succes- 
sion of  strata,  which,  above  and  below  it,  are  exactly  alike, 
and  have  obviously  been  at  one  time  in  contact  with  each 
other. 

Granite,  as  Hutton  pointed  out,  differs  in  many  important 
respects  from  "  whinstone,"  more  particularly  in  its  position, 
for  it  was  then  believed  to  lie  beneath  all  the  known  rocks, 
rising  to  higher  elevations  and  sinking  to  greater  depths 
than  any  other  material  in  the  crust  of  the  earth.  Yet 
though  he  admitted  its  infra-position,  he  differed  from  the 
Neptunists  in  regard  to  its  relative  antiquity.  He  believed 
it  to  be  younger  than  the  strata  that  rest  upon  it,  for  he 
regarded  it  as  a  mass  that  had  once  been  melted,  and 
been  intruded  among  the  rocks  with  which  it  is  now  foun( 
associated.  He  based  this  conclusion  upon  various  obser- 
vations, chief  among  which  was  the  occurrence  of  abundanj 
veins  that  diverge  from  the  granite  and  ramify  throug] 
the  surrounding  rocks,  diminishing  in  width  as  they  recc 
from  their  parent  mass. 

Properly  to  appreciate  the  value  of  these  doctrines  in 
regard  to  the  development  of  a  sound  geological  philosophy, 
we  must  bear  in  mind  what  were  the  prevalent  views 
entertained  on  the  subject  when  Hutton's  work  was 
published.  We  have  seen  that  granite,  generally  regarded 
as  an  aqueous  formation,  was  affirmed  by  Werner  to  have 
been  the  first  precipitate  that  fell  from  his  univeral  ocean. 
De  Saussure,  who  had  seen  more  of  granite  and  its  relations 
than  Werner,  or  indeed  than  any  other  geologist  of  his 
time,  remained  up  to  the  last  a  firm  believer  in  the  aqueous 
origin  of  that  rock.  Even  after  the  death  of  the  great 
Swiss  geologist,  Cuvier,  sharing  his  opinions  on  these 


1 76  The  Foimders  of  Geology  LECT. 

matters,  proclaimed  as  late  as  1810  his  belief  that  De 
Saussure  overthrew  the  doctrine  of  central  fire,  or  of  a 
source  of  heat  within  the  earth's  interior,  demonstrated 
granite  to  be  the  first-formed  rock,  and  proved  it  to  have 
been  formed  in  strata  deposited  in  water.1  Nobody  before 
Hutton's  time  had  been  bold  enough  to  imagine  a  series  of 
subterranean  intrusions  of  molten  matter.  Those  who 
adopted  his  opinion  on  this  subject  were  styled  Plutonists, 
and  were  looked  upon  as  a  section  of  the  Vulcanists,  but 
as  carrying  out  their  doctrines  to  still  greater  extravagance, 
"attributing  to  the  action  of  fire  widely -diffused  rocks 
which  nobody  had  till  then  ever  dreamt  of  removing  from 
the  domain  of  water." 2 

According  to  the  Huttonian  theory,  fissures  and  openings 
have  from  time  to  time  arisen  in  the  external  crust  of 
the  earth,  and  have  reached  down  to  the  intensely  hot 
nucleus.  Into  these  the  molten  material  has  ascended, 
forming  veins  of  whinstone  underground,  and,  where  it  has 
reached  the  surface,  issuing  there  in  the  form  of  lava 
and  the  other  phenomena  of  volcanoes.  Every  geologist 
recognizes  these  generalizations  as  part  of  the  familiar 
teachings  of  modern  geology. 

We  have  seen  that  Werner  made  no  distinction,  as 
regards  origin,  between  what  we  now  call  mineral  veins 
and  the  dykes  and  veins  of  granite,  basalt,  or  other 
eruptive  rocks.  He  looked  upon  them  all  as  the  results  of 
chemical  precipitation  from  an  ocean  that  covered  the 
rocks  in  which  fissures  had  been  formed.  Hutton,  in  like 
manner,  drew  no  line  between  the  same  two  well-marked 

1  Cuvier,  "Eloge  de  De  Saussure,"  rfloges,  i.  p.  427. 
2  Cuvier,  op.  cit.  ii.  p.  363. 


iv  Hutton  and  Werner  compared  177 

y^ 


series  of  veins,  but  regarded  them  all  as_du<s  to  t 
duction  of  igneous  material.  Though  more  logical  than 
Werner,  he  was,  as  we  now  know,  entirely  in  error  in 
confounding  under  one  denomination  two  totally  distinct 
assemblages  of  mineral  matter.  Werner  correctly  referred  f  ^ 
veins  of  ores^  and  spars  to  deposition  from  aqueous  solution,  \ 
but  was  completely  mistaken  in  attributing  the  same 
origin  to  veins  of  massive  rock.  Hutton,  on  the  other 
hand,  went  as  far  astray  in  regard  to  his  explanation  of 
mineral  veins,  but  he  made  an  important  contribution  to 
science  in  his  insistence  upon  the  truly  intrusive  nature  of 
veins  of  granite  and  whinstone. 

There  was  another  point  of  difference  between  the/ 
views  of  Werner  and  of  Hutton  in  regard  to  mineral  | 
veins.  One  of  the  undoubted  services  of  the  Freiberg 
professor  was  his  clear  demonstration  that  veins  could  be 
classified  according  to  their  directions,  that  this  arrange- 
ment often  sufficed  to  separate  them  also  according  to 
age  and  material,  those  running  along  one  parallel,  and 
containing  one  group  of  minerals,  being  intersected  by, 
and  therefore  older  than,  another  series  following  a  different 
direction,  and  consisting  of  other  metals  and  vein-stones. 
This  important  distinction  found  no  place  in  Hutton's 
system.  To  him  it  was  enough  that  he  was  able  to  show 
that  the  veins  known  to  him  were  intrusive  masses  of 
igneous  origin.1 

In  the  Huttonian   theory  we  find  the  germ   of  the 

1  In  Playfair's  Illustrations,  however,  the  successive  origin  of  mineral 
veins  is  distinctly  affirmed,  §  226.  Reference  is  there  made  to  the  coin- 
cidence between  the  prevalent  direction  of  the  principal  Cornish  veins  and 
the  general  strike  of  the  strata,  and  to  the  intersection  of  these  by  the 
cross-courses  at  nearly  right  angles. 

N 


178  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Lyellian  doctrine  of  metamorphism.  Hutton,  having  de- 
monstrated that  granite  is  not  an  aqueous  but  an  igneous 
rock,  further  showed  that  the  "  Alpine  schistus,"  that  is, 
the  series  of  crystalline  schists,  being  stratified,  could  not 
be  original  or  primitive,  but  must  have  been  deposited  in 
successive  layers  like  more  recent  sediments,  and  were 
invaded  and  altered  by  the  granite.  Let  me  quote  a 
passage  from  his  chapter  "On  the  Primary  Part  of  the 
Present  Earth"  in  illustration  of  the  sagacity  of  his 
judgment  on  this  subject:  "If,  in  examining  our  land, 
we  shall  find  a  mass  of  matter  which  had  been  evidently 
formed  originally  in  the  ordinary  manner  of  stratification, 
but  which  is  now  extremely  distorted  in  its  structure  and 
displaced  in  its  position, — which  is  also  extremely  con- 
solidated in  its  mass  and  variously  changed  in  its  com- 
position,— which,  therefore,  has  the  marks  of  its  original 
or  marine  composition  extremely  obliterated,  and  many 
subsequent  veins  of  melted  mineral  matter  interjected, 
we  should  then  have  reason  to  suppose  that  here  were 
masses  of  matter  which,  though  not  different  in  their  origin 
from  those  that  are  gradually  deposited  at  the  bottom  of 
the  ocean,  have  been  more  acted  upon  by  subterranean 
heat  and  the  expanding  power,  that  is  to  say,  have  been 
changed  in  a  greater  degree  by  the  operations  of  the 
mineral  kingdom."1  Hutton  here  compresses  into  a 
single,  though  somewhat  cumbrous,  sentence  the  doctrine 
to  which  Lyell  in  later  years  gave  the  name  of  meta- 
morphism. 

Button's  vision   not  only  reached  far  back  into  the 
geological  past,  it  stretched  into  the  illimitable  future, 

1  Theory  of  the  Earth,  vol.  i.  pp.  375,  376. 


iv          Hut  ton  on  Degradation  of  the  Land       179 

and  it  embraced  also  a  marvellously  broad  yet  minute 
survey  of  the  present.  From  his  early  youth  he  had 
been  struck  with  the  evidence  of  incessant  decayjupon 
the  surface  of  the  dry  land.  With  admirable  insight  he 
k'ept  holct ""oFTiEis  cardinal  fact,  and  followed  it  fearlessly 
from  mountain-top  to  sea-shore.  Wherever  we  may  go, 
on  each  variety  of  rock,  in  every  kind  of  climate,  the 
doom  of  dissolution  seemed  to  him  to  be  written  in  in- 
effaceable characters  upon  the  whole  surface  of  the  dry 
land,  v  No  sooner  was  the  bed  of  the  ocean  heaved  up 
into  mountains,  than  the  new  terrestrial  surface  began  to 
be  attacked.  Chemical  and  mechanical  agents  were  recog- 
nized as  concerned  in  this  disintegration,  though  the 
precise  nature  and  extent  of  their  several  operations  had 
not  then  been  studied.  The  general  result  produced  by 
them,  however,  was  never  appreciated  by  any  observer 
more  clearly  than  by  Hutton.  From  the  coast,  worn  into 
stack  and  skerry  and  cave,  by  the  ceaseless  grinding  of 
the  waves,  he  had  followed  the  progress  of  corrosion  up 
to  the  crests  of  his  Scottish  hills.  No  rock,  even  the 
hardest,  could  escape,  though  some  resisted  more  stubbornly 
than  others. 

The  universality  of  this  terrestrial  waste  had  been  more 
or  less  distinctly  perceived  by  previous  writers.  But 
Hutton  saw  a  meaning  in  it  which  no  one  before  him  had 
suspected.  To  his  eye,  while  the  whole  land  undergoes 
loss,  it  is  along  certain  lines  traced  by  running  water  that 
this  loss  reaches  its  greatest  amount.  In  the  channels  of 
the  streams  that  carry  off  the  drainage  of  the  land  he 
recognized  the  results  of  a  constant  erosion  of  the  rocks 
by  the  water  flowing  over  them.  As  the  generalization 


.  f 

1  80  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 


_  _____  _ 

t*  /^was   beautifully   expressed   by   Playfair  :    "  Every   river 
\  appears  to  consist  of  a  main  trunk,  fed  from  a  variety  of 
\branches,  each  running  in  a  valley  proportioned  to  its 
/size,  and  all  of  them  together  forming  a  system  of  valleys, 
/  communicating  with  one  another,  and  having  such  a  nice 
^adjustment  of  their  declivities,  that  none  of  them  join  the 
/  principal  valley,  either  on  too  high  or  too  low  a  level,  a 
circumstance  which  would  be  infinitely  improbable  if  each 
of  these  valleys  were  not  the  work  of  the  stream  that 
\  flows  in  it. 

"  If,  indeed,  a  river  consisted  of  a  single  stream  without 
branches,  running  in  a  straight  valley,  it  might  be  supposed 
that  some  great  concussion,  or  some  powerful  torrent,  had 
opened  at  once  the  channel  by  which  its  waters  are  con- 
ducted to  the  ocean  ;  but,  when  the  usual  form  of  a  river 
is  considered,  the  trunk  divided  into  many  branches, 
which  rise  at  a  great  distance  from  one  another,  and  these 
again  subdivided  into  an  infinity  of  smaller  ramifications, 
it  becomes  strongly  impressed  upon  the  mind  that  all 
these  channels  have  been  cut  by  the  waters  themselves  ; 
that  they  have  been  slowly  dug  out  by  the  washing  and 
erosion  of  the  land  ;  and  that  it  is  by  the  repeated  touches 
of  the  same  instrument  that  this  curious  assemblage  of 
lines  has  been  engraved  so  deeply  on  the  surface  of  the 
globe."1 

The  whole  of  the  modern  doctrine  of  earth-sculpture 
is  to  be  found  in  the  Huttonian  theory.  We  shall 
better  appreciate  the  sagacity  and  prescience  of  Button 
and  Playfair,  if  we  remember  that  their  views  on  this 
subject  were  in  their  lifetime,  and  for  many  years  after- 

1  Illustrations  of  the  Huttonian  Theory,  p.  102. 


iv        The  Huttonian  Explanation  of  Valleys    1 8 1 

wards,  ignored  or  explicitly  rejected,  even  by  those  who 
accepted  the  rest  of  their  teaching.  Hall,  their  friend  and 
associate,  could  not  share  their  opinions  on  this  subject. 
Lyell  too,  who  adopted  so  much  of  the  Huttonian  theory 
and  became  the  great  prophet  of  the  Uniformitarian 
school,  never  would  admit  the  truth  of  Hutton's  doctrine 
concerning  the  origin  of  valleys.  Nor  even  now  is  that^ 
doctrine  universally  accepted.  It  was  Jukes  who  in  1862 
revived  an  interest  in  the  subject,  by  showing  how  com- 
pletely the  valley  system  in  the  south  of  Ireland  was  due 
to  the  action  of  the  rivers.1  Eamsay  soon  after  followed 
with  further  illustrations  of  the  principle.2  But  un- 
questionably the  most  effective  support  to  Hutton's  teach- 
ing has  been  given  by  the  geologists  of  the  United  States, 
who,  among  the  comparatively  undisturbed  strata  of  the 
Western  Territories,  have  demonstrated,  by  proofs  which 
the  most  sceptical  must  receive,  the  potency  of  denudation 
in  the  production  of  the  topography  of  the  land. 

To  the  Huttonian  school  belongs  also  the  conspicuous 
merit  of  having  been  the  first  to  recognize  the  potency  of 
glaciers  in  the  transport  of  detritus  from  the  mountains. 
Playfair,  in  his  characteristically  brief  and  luminous  way, 
proclaimed  at  the  beginning  of  this  century  that  "  for  the 
removing  of  large  masses  of  rock  the  most  powerful 
engines  without  doubt  which  nature  employs  are  the 
glaciers,  those  lakes  or  rivers  of  ice  which  are  formed  in 
the  highest  valleys  of  the  Alps,  and  other  mountains  of 
the  first  order.  .  .  .  Before  the  valleys  were  cut  out  in 
the  form  they  now  are,  and  when  the  mountains  were 

1  Quart.  Journ.  GeoL  Soc.  xviii.  (1862). 
2  The  Physical  Geology  and  Geography  of  Great  Britain,  1863. 


1 82  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

still  more  elevated,  huge  fragments  of  rock  may  have  been 
carried  to  a  great  distance  ;  and  it  is  not  wonderful  if 
these  same  masses,  greatly  diminished  in  size,  and  reduced 
to  gravel  or  sand,  have  reached  the  shores  or  even  the 
bottom  of  the  ocean."1  Here  the  former  conception  of 
the  greater  extension  of  the  glaciers  was  foreshadowed  as 
a  possible  or  even  probable  event  in  geological  history. 
Yet  for  half  a  century  or  more  after  Playfair's  time,  men 
were  still  speculating  on  the  probability  of  the  transport 
of  the  erratics  by  floating  icebergs  during  a  submergence 
of  Central  Europe  under  the  sea, — an  hypothesis  for  which 
there  was  not  a  particle  of  evidence.  No  geologist  now 
questions  the  truth  of  Playfair's  suggestion. 

In  the  whole  of  Button's  doctrine  he  rigorously 
guarded  himself  against  the  admission  of  any  principle 
which  could  not  be  founded  on  observation.  He  made  no 
assumptions.  Every  step  in  his  deductions  was  based 
upon  actual  fact,  and  the  facts  were  so  arranged  as  to 
yield  naturally  and  inevitably  the  conclusion  which  he 
drew  from  them.  Let  me  quote  from  the  conclusion  of  his 
work  a  few  sentences  in  illustration  of  these  statements. 
In  the  interpretation  of  nature,  he  remarks,  "no  powers 
are  to  be  employed  that  are  not  natural  to  the  globe,  no 
tion  to  be  admitted  of  except  those  of  which  we  know 
the  principle,  and  no  extraordinary  events  to  be  alleged 
in  order  to  explain  a  common  appearance.  The  powers  of 
nature  are  not  to  be  employed  in  order  to  destroy  the 
very  object  of  those  powers ;  we  are  not  to  make  nature 
act  in  violation  to  that  order  which  we  actually  observe, 
and  in  subversion  of  that  end  which  is  to  be  perceived  in 

1  Illustrations,  p.  388. 


iv  Huttoris  Friends  in  Edinburgh  183 

the  system  of  created  things.  In  whatever  manner,  there- 
fore, we  are  to  employ  the  great  agents,  fire  and  water,  for 
producing  those  things  which  appear,  it  ought  to  be  in 
such  a  way  as  is  consistent  with  the  propagation  of  plants 
and  the  life  of  animals  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth. 
Chaos  and  confusion  are  not  to  be  introduced  into  the 
order  of  nature,  because  certain  things  appear  to  our 
practical  views  as  being  in  some  disorder.  ISTor  are  we 
to  proceed  in  feigning  causes  when  those  seem  insufficient  1 
which  occur^in  our  experience."  -1  J 

No  geologist  ever  lived  among  a  more  congenial  and 
helpful  group  of  friends  than  Hutton.  While  they  had  a 
profound  respect  for  his  genius,  they  were  drawn  towards 
him  by  his  winning  personality,  and  he  became  the  centre 
of  all  that  was  bright,  vivacious  and  cheerful  in  that 
remarkable  circle  of  eminent  men.  If  he  wanted  advice 
and  assistance  in  chemical  questions,  there  was  his  bosom- 
friend  Joseph  Black,  ever  ready  to  pour  out  his  ample 
stores  of  knowledge,  and  to  test  every  proposition  by  the 
light  of  his  wide  experience  and  his  sober  judgment.  If 
he  needed  companionship  and  assistance  in  his  field 
journeys,  there  was  the  sagacious  Clerk  of  Eldin,  willing 
to  join  him,  to  examine  his  evidence  with  judicial 
impartiality,  and  to  sketch  for  him  with  an  artistic 
pencil  the  geological  sections  on  which  he  laid  most 
stress.  If  he  felt  himself  in  need  of  the  counsel  of  a  clear 
logical  intellect,  accustomed  to  consider  physical  prob- 
lems with  the  precision  of  a  mathematician,  there  was  ' 
the  kindly  sympathetic  Playfair,  ever  prompt  and  pleased 
to  do  him  a  service.  With  such  companions  he  discussed 

1  Theory  of  the  Earth,  vol.  ii.  p.  547. 


LECT. 


184  The  Founders  of  Geology 

his  theory  in  all  its  bearings.  Their  approval  was  ample 
enough  for  his  ambition.  He  was  never  tempted  to  court 
publicity  by  frequent  communications  to  learned  societies, 
or  the  issue  of  independent  works  treating  of  his  geo- 
logical observations  and  discoveries.  But  for  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Royal  Society  of  Edinburgh,  he  might  have 
delayed  for  years  the  preparation  of  the  first  sketch  of  his 
theory,  and  had  it  not  been  for  the  virulent  attacks  of 
Kirwan,  he  might  never  have  been  induced  to  finish  the 
preparation  of  his  great  work.  He  was  a  man  absorbed 
in  the  investigation  of  nature,  to  whom  personal  renown 
was  a  matter  of  utter  indifference. 

Among  Hutton's  friends  there  was  one  in  particular  to 
whom  a  distinguished  place  in  the  list  of  the  founders  of 
geology  must  be  assigned — Sir  James  Hall  of  Dunglass 
(1761-1832).  To  this  original  investigator  we  owe  the 
establishment  of  experimental  research,  as  a  branch  of 
geological  investigation.  Inheriting  a  baronetcy  and  a 
landed  estate  in  East  Lothian,  not  far  from  the  picturesque 
cliffs  of  St.  Abb's  Head,  and  possessed  of  ample  leisure  for 
the  prosecution  of  intellectual  pursuits,  he  was  led  to 
interest  himself  in  geology.  His  father,  a  man  of  scientific 
tastes,  became  acquainted  with  Hutton  when  the  future 
philosopher  was  a  farmer  in  the  neighbouring  county  of 
Berwick.  From  these  early  days  Hutton  found  the  hospi- 
tality of  Dunglass  always  open  to  him.  It  will  be  re- 
membered that  the  famous  visit  to  Siccar  Point,  described 
by  Playfair,  was  made  with  Sir  James  from  that  house. 

At  first  Sir  James  Hall  could  not  bring  himself  to 
accept  Hutton's  views.  "  I  was  induced,"  he  tells  us,  "  to 
reject  his  system  entirely,  and  should  probably  have  con- 


IV 


Sir  James  Hall  185 


tinned  still  to  do  so,  with  the  great  majority  of  the  world,  but 
for  my  habits  of  intimacy  with  the  author,  the  vivacity  and 
perspicuity  of  whose  conversation  formed  a  striking  con- 
trast to  the  obscurity  of  his  writings.  I  was  induced  by 
that  charm,  and  by  the  numerous  original  facts  which  his 
system  had  led  him  to  observe,  to  listen  to  his  arguments 
in  favour  of  opinions  which  I  then  looked  upon  as 
visionary.  After  three  years  of  almost  daily  warfare 
with  Dr.  Hutton  on  the  subject  of  his  theory,  I  began 
to  view  his  fundamental  principles  with  less  and  less 
repugnance." J 

As  his  objections  diminished,  Hall's  interest  in  the 
details  of  the  system  increased.  His  practical  mind  soon 
perceived  that  some  of  the  principles,  which  Hutton  had 
established  by  reasoning  and  analogy,  might  be  brought  to 
the  test  of  direct  experiment.  And  he  urged  his  friend  to 
make  the  attempt,  or  allow  him  to  carry  out  the  necessary 
researches.  The  proposal  received  little  encouragement 
from  the  philosopher.  Hutton  believed  that  the  scale  of 
nature's  processes  was  so  vast  that  no  imitation  of  them, 
on  the  small  scale  of  a  laboratory,  could  possibly  lead  to 
any  reliable  results,  or  as  he  afterwards  expressed  himself 
in  print,  "  there  are  superficial  reasoning  men  who,  without 
truly  knowing  what  they  see,  think  they  know  those 
regions  of  the  earth  which  can  never  be  seen,  and  who 
judge  of  the  great  operations  of  the  mineral  kingdom  from 
having  kindled  a  fire  and  looked  into  the  bottom  of  a  little 
crucible." 2 

Sir  James  Hall,  notwithstanding  his  veneration  for  his 

1  Trans.  Ray.  Soc.  Edin.  vi.  (1812),  pp.  71-186. 
2  Theory  of  the  Earth,  vol.  i.  p.  251. 


1 86  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

master,  could  not  agree  with  him  in  this  verdict.  He  was 
confirmed  in  his  opinion  by  an  accident  which  had 
occurred  at  the  Leith  glass-works,  where  a  large  mass  of 
common  green  glass,  that  had  been  allowed  to  cool 
slowly,  was  found  to  have  lost  all  the  properties  of  glass, 
becoming  opaque,  white,  hard  and  crystalline.  Yet  a 
piece  of  this  substance,  when  once  more  melted  and  rapidly 
cooled,  recovered  its  true  vitreous  characters.  Hall's 
shrewd  instinct  at  once  applied  this  observation  to  the 
Huttonian  doctrine  of  the  igneous  origin  of  granite  and 
other  rocks.  It  had  been  objected  to  Hutton's  views 
that  the  effect  of  great  heat  on  rocks  was  to  reduce 
them  to  the  condition  of  glass,  but  that  granite  and  whin- 
stone,  being  crystalline  substances,  could  never  possibly 
have  been  melted.  Yet  here,  in  this  glass-house  material, 
it  could  be  demonstrated  that  a  thoroughly  molten  glass 
could,  by  slow  cooling,  be  converted  into  a  crystalline 
condition,  and  could  be  changed  once  more  by  fusion  into 
glass.  Hutton  had  overlooked  the  possibility  that  the 
results  of  fusion  might  be  modified  by  the  rate  of  cooling, 
and  Hall  at  once  began  to  test  the  matter  by  experiment. 
He  repeated  the  process  by  which  the  devitrified  glass 
had  been  accidentally  obtained  at  the  glass-house,  and 
found  that  he  could  at  will  produce,  from  the  same  mass  of 
bottle  glass,  either  a  glass  or  a  stony  substance,  according 
to  the  rate  at  which  he  allowed  it  to  cool. 

Sir  James  was  too  loyal  a  friend  and  too  devoted  an 
admirer  of  the  author  of  the  Theory  of  the  Earth  to  pursue 
these  researches  far  during  the  philosopher's  lifetime.  "  I 
considered  myself  as  bound,"  he  tells  us,  "  in  practice  to 
pay  deference  to  his  opinion,  in  a  field  which  he  had  already 


IV 


Sir  James  Hall  187 


so  nobly  occupied,  and  I  abstained  during  the  remainder  of 
his  life  from  the  prosecution  of  experiments  which  I  had 
begun  in  1790." 1 

The  death  of  Hutton  in  179*7  allowed  the  laird  of 
Dunglass  to  resume  the  experiments  on  which  he  had  been 
meditating  during  the  intervening  years.  Selecting  samples 
of  "  whinstones,"  that  is,  intrusive  dolerites  and  basalts, 
from  the  dykes  and  sills  in  the  Carboniferous  strata  around 
Edinburgh,  he  reduced  them  in  the  reverberatory  furnace 
of  an  iron-foundry  to  the  condition  of  perfect  glass. 
Portions  of  this  glass  were  afterwards  re-fused  and  allowed 
to  cool  very  slowly.  There  was  thus  obtained  "  a  substance 
differing  in  all  respects  from  glass,  and  in  texture  com- 
pletely resembling  whinstone."  This  substance  had  a 
distinctly  crystalline  structure,  and  Hall  gave  it  the  name 
of  crystallite,  which  had  been  suggested  by  the  chemist, 
Dr.  Hope. 

Before  he  was  interested  in  the  defence  of  the  Hut- 
tonian  theory,  Sir  James  had  made  a  journey  into  Italy  in 
the  year  1785,  visiting  Vesuvius,  Etna,  and  the  Lipari 
Isles,  and  having  for  part  of  the  time  the  advantage  of  the 
company  of  Dolomieu.  He  could  not  help  being  much 
struck  with  the  resemblance  between  the  lavas  of  these 
volcanic  regions  and  the  familiar  "  whinstones  "  of  his  own 
country.  So  close  was  this  resemblance  in  every  respect 
that  he  felt  "  confident  that  there  was  not  a  lava  in  Mount 
Etna  to  which  a  counterpart  might  not  be  produced  from 
the  whinstones  of  Scotland."  At  Monte  Somma  he  noted 
the  abundant  "  vertical  lavas "  which,  in  bands  from  two 

1  For  Hall's  papers  see  Trans.  Roy.  Soc.  Edin.  iii.  (1790),  p.  8  ;  v.  (1798), 
p.  43  ;  vi.  (1812),  p.  71  ;  vii.  (1812),  pp.  79,  139,  169  ;  x.  (1825),  p.  314. 


1 88  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

to  twelve  feet  broad,  run  up  the  old  crater-wall.  These 
bands  seemed  to  him  at  the  time  "to  present  only  an 
amusing  variety  in  the  history  of  volcanic  eruptions,"  and, 
like  Dolomieu  and  Breislak,  he  looked  on  them  as  marking 
the  positions  of  rents  which,  formed  in  the  mountain 
during  former  volcanic  explosions,  had  been  filled  in 
from  above  by  the  outflow  of  lava  down  the  outer  fissured 
surface  of  the  cone.  Subsequent  reflection,  however,  led 
him  to  reconsider  this  opinion,  and  to  realize  that  these 
"  vertical  lavas "  were  "  of  the  utmost  consequence  in 
geology,  by  supplying  an  intermediate  link  between  the 
external  and  subterraneous  productions  of  heat.  I  now 
think,"  he  remarks,  "  that  though  we  judged  rightly  in 
believing  those  lavas  to  have  flowed  in  crevices,  we  were 
mistaken  as  to  their  direction ;  for  instead  of  flowing  down- 
wards, I  am  convinced  they  have  flowed  upwards,  and  that 
the  crevices  have  performed  the  office  of  pipes,  through 
which  lateral  explosions  have  found  a  vent."  He  had 
observed,  also,  that  the  outer  margins  of  some  of  these 
dykes,  in  contact  with  the  surrounding  rock,  were  vitreous, 
while  the  central  parts  presented  the  ordinary  lithoid 
texture.  This  difference,  he  saw,  was  fully  explained  by 
his  fusion  experiments,  the  lava  having  risen  in  a  cold 
fissure,  and  having  been  suddenly  chilled  along  its  outer 
surface,  while  the  inner  parts  cooled  more  slowly  and  took 
a  crystalline  structure. 

These  observations  are  of  historic  interest  in  the  pro- 
gress of  volcanic  geology.  Hall  had  sagaciously  found  the 
true  interpretation  of  volcanic  dykes,  and  he  at  once 
proceeded  to  apply  it  to  the  explanation  of  the  abundant 
dykes  of  Scotland.  He  thus  brought  to  the  support  of 


IV 


Sir  James  Hall  189 


Button's  doctrine  of  the  igneous  intrusion  of  these  rocks  a 
new  and  strong  confirmation  from  the  actual  crater  of  an 
ancient  volcano. 

When  engaged  upon  his  fusion  experiments  with 
Scottish  whinstones,  it  occurred  to  Hall  to  subject  to  the 
same  processes  specimens  of  the  lavas  which  he  had 
brought  from  Vesuvius  and  Etna.  The  results  which 
he  thus  obtained  were  precisely  similar  to  those  which 
the  rocks  from  Scotland  had  yielded.  He  was  able  to 
demonstrate  that  lavas  may  be  fused  into  a  perfect  glass, 
and  that  this  glass,  on  being  re-melted  and  allowed  to  cool 
gradually,  passes  into  a  stony  substance  not  unlike  the 
original  lava.  In  this  manner,  the  close  agreement  between 
modern  lavas  and  the  ancient  basalts  of  Scotland  was 
clearly  proved,  while  their  identity  in  chemical  composition 
was  further  shown  by  some  analyses  made  by  Dr.  Eobert 
Kennedy.  Sir  James  Hall  had  thus  the  satisfaction  of 
showing  that  a  fresh  appeal  to  direct  experiment  and 
observation  furnished  further  powerful  support  to  some  of 
the  disputed  doctrines  in  the  theory  of  his  old  friend 
Button.1 

There  was  another  and  still  more  important  direction  in 
which  it  seemed  to  this  original  investigator  that  the 
Huttonian  doctrines  might  be  subjected  to  the  test  of 
experiment.  It  was  an  important  feature  in  these  doctrines 
that  the  effects  of  heat  upon  rocks  must  differ  very  much 
according  to  the  pressure  under  which  the  heat  is  applied. 
Hall  argued,  like  Hutton,  that  within  the  earth's  crust  the 

1  "Experiments  on  Whin  stone  and  Lava,"  read  before  the  Royal 
Society  of  Edinburgh  5th  March  and  18th  June  1798,  Trans.  Eoy.  Soc. 
Edin.  vol.  v.  p.  43. 


1 90  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

influence  of  great  compression  must  retard  the  fusion  of 
mineral  substances,  and  retain  within  them  ingredients 
which,  at  the  ordinary  atmospheric  pressure  above  ground, 
are  rapidly  volatilized.  He  thus  accounted  for  the  retention 
of  carbonic  acid  by  calcareous  rocks,  even  at  such  high 
temperatures  as  might  melt  them.  Here  then  was  a  wide 
but  definite  field  for  experiment,  and  Hall  entered  it  with 
the  joy  of  a  first  pioneer.  As  soon  as  he  had  done  with  his 
whinstone  fusions,  he  set  to  work  to  construct  a  set  of 
apparatus  that  would  enable  him  to  subject  minerals  and 
rocks  to  the  highest  obtainable  temperatures  in  hermetically 
closed  tubes.  For  six  or  seven  years,  he  continued  his 
researches,  conducting  more  than  500  ingeniously  devised 
experiments.  He  enclosed  carbonate  of  lime  in  firmly 
secured  gun -barrels,  in  porcelain  tubes,  in  tubes  bored 
through  solid  iron,  and  exposed  it  to  the  highest  tempera- 
tures he  could  obtain. 

He  was  able  to  fuse  the  carbonate  without  the  loss  of 
its  carbonic  acid,  thus  practically  demonstrating  the  truth 
of  Button's  contention.  He  obtained  from  pounded  chalk 
a  substance  closely  resembling  marble.  Applying  these 
results  to  the  Huttonian  theory,  he  contended  that  the 
effects  shown  by  his  experiments  must  occur  also  on  a 
great  scale  at  the  roots  of  volcanoes ;  that  subterranean 
lavas  may  melt  limestone  ;  that  where  the  molten  rock 
comes  in  contact  with  shell-beds,  it  may  either  drive  off 
their  carbonic  acid  or  convert  them  into  limestone,  accord- 
ing to  the  heat  of  the  lava  and  the  depth  under  which  it 
acts  ;  and  that  his  experiments  enabled  him  to  pronounce 
under  what  conditions  the  one  or  the  other  of  these  effects 
would  be  produced.  He  concluded  that  having  succeeded 


iv  Sir  James  Hall  191 

in  fusing  limestone  under  pressure,  he  could  adduce  in  that 
single  result  "a  strong  presumption  in  favour  of  the  solution 
which  Dr.  Hutton  has  advanced  of  all  the  geological 
phenomena ;  for  the  truth  of  the  most  doubtful  principle 
which  he  has  assumed  has  thus  been  established  by 
direct  experiment." 1 

Hardly  less  striking  were  Hall's  experiments  in  illustra- 
tion of  the  processes  whereby  strata,  originally  horizontal, 
have  been  thrown  into  plications.  His  machine  for  contort- 
ing layers  of  clay  is  familiar  to  geological  students  from  the 
illustrations  of  it  given  in  text-books.2  He  showed  how 
closely  the  convolutions  of  the  Silurian  strata  of  the  Ber- 
wickshire coast  could  be  experimentally  imitated  by  the 
lateral  compression  of  layers  of  clay  under  considerable 
vertical  pressure.  In  this,  as  in  his  other  applications  of 
experiment,  he  led  the  way,  and  laid  the  foundation  on 
which  later  observers  have  built  with  such  success. 

There  was  thus  established  at  Edinburgh  a  group  of 
earnest  and  successful  investigators  of  the  history  of  the 
earth,  who  promulgated  a  new  philosophy  of  geology,  based 

1  "  Account  of  a  series  of  experiments  showing  the  effects  of  compression 
in  modifying  the  action  of  heat,"  read  to  the  Royal  Society  of  Edinburgh, 
3rd  June  1805. — Trans.  Roy.  Soc.  JEdin.  vi.  p.  71.      The  same  ingenious 
observer  subsequently  instituted  a  series  of  experiments  to  imitate  the 
consolidation  of  strata.     By  filling  an  iron  vessel  with  brine  and  having 
layers  of  sand  at  the  bottom  he  was  able  to  keep  the  lower  portions  of  the 
sand  at  a  red  heat,  while  the  brine  at  the  top  was  not  too  hot  to  let  the 
hand  be  put  into  it.     In  the  end  the  sand  at  the  bottom  was  found  com- 
pacted into  sandstone. — Op.  cit.  x.  (1825),  p.  314. 

2  Trans.  Eoy.  Soc.  Edin.  vol.  vii.  p.  79  and  Plate  iv.     As  already  re- 
marked, Hall  differed  from  his  master  and  from  Playfair  in  regard  to  their 
views  on  the  efficacy  of  subaerial  denudation.     He  preferred  to  invoke 
gigantic  debacles,  and  to  these  he  attributed  the  transport  of  large  boulders 
and  the  smoothing  and  striation  of  rocks,  now  attributed  to  the  action  of 
glaciers  and  ice-sheets. 


1 92  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

upon  close  observation  and  carefully  devised  experiment. 
Among  these  men  there  was  only  one  teacher — the  gentle 
and  eloquent  Playfair  ;  but  his  functions  at  the  University 
were  to  teach  mathematics  and  natural  philosophy.  He 
had  thus  no  opportunity  of  training  a  school  of  disciples 
who  might  be  sent  forth  to  combat  the  errors  of  the 
dominant  Wernerianism.  He  did  what  he  could  in  that 
direction  by  preparing  and  publishing  his  admirable  "  Illus- 
trations," which  were  widely  read,  and,  as  Hall  has  re- 
corded, exerted  a  powerful  influence  on  the  minds  of  the 
most  eminent  men  of  science  of  the  day. 

But  another  influence  strongly  antagonistic  to  the  pro- 
gress of  the  Huttonian  philosophy  was  established  in 
Edinburgh  at  the  very  time  when  the  prospect  seemed  so 
fair  for  the  creation  of  a  Scottish  school  which  might  do 
much  to  further  the  advance  of  sound  geology.  Eobert 
Jameson  (1774-1854)  studied  for  nearly  two  years  at 
Freiberg  under  Werner,  and  after  two  more  years  spent 
in  continental  travel,  full  of  enthusiasm  for  his  master's 
system,  returned  to  the  Scottish  capital  in  1804,  when  he 
was  elected  to  the  Chair  of  Natural  History  in  the  Univer- 
sity. His  genial  personal  character,  and  his  zeal  for  the 
Freiberg  faith  soon  gathered  a  band  of  ardent  followers 
around  him.  He  had  much  of  Werner's  power  of  fostering 
in  others  a  love  of  the  subjects  that  interested  himself. 
Travelling  widely  over  Scotland,  from  the  southern  borders 
to  the  furthest  Shetland  Isles,  he  everywhere  saw  the  rocks 
through  Saxon  spectacles.  From  the  very  beginning,  the 
books  and  papers  which  he  wrote  were  drawn  up  after  the 
most  approved  Wernerian  method,  pervaded  by  the  amplest 
confidence  in  that  method,  and  by  hardly  disguised  con- 


IV 


Robert  Jameson  1 9  3 


tempt  for  every  other.  Nowhere  indeed  can  the  pecu- 
liarities of  the  Wernerian  style  be  seen  in  more  typical 
perfection  than  in  the  writings  of  the  Edinburgh  pro- 
fessor.1 

In  the  year  1808,  Jameson  founded  a  new  scientific 
association  in  Edinburgh,  which  he  called  the  "  Wernerian 
Natural  History  Society,"  with  the  great  Werner  himself 
at  the  head  of  its  list  of  honorary  members.  So  far  as 
geology  was  concerned,  the  original  aim  of  this  institution 
appears  to  have  been  to  spread  the  doctrines  of  Freiberg. 
I  know  no  more  melancholy  contrast  in  geological  litera- 
ture than  is  presented  when  we  pass  from  the  glowing  pages 
of  Playfair,  or  the  suggestive  papers  of  Hall,  to  the  dreary 
geognostical  communications  in  the  first  published  Memoirs 
of  this  Wernerian  Society.  On  the  one  side,  we  breathe 
the  spirit  of  the  most  enlightened  modern  geological 
philosophy,  on  the  other  we  grope  in  the  darkness  oJLa 
Saxon  mine,  and  listen  to  the  repetition  of  the  familiar 
shibboleths,  which  even  the  more  illustrious  of  Werner's 
disciples  were  elsewhere  beginning  to  discard. 

The  importation  of  the  Freiberg  doctrines  into  Scotland 
by  an  actual  pupil  of  Werner,  carried  with  it  the  contro- 
versy as  to  the  origin  of  basalt.  This  question  might 
have  been  thought  to  have  been  practically  settled  there  by 
the  writings  of  Hutton,  Playfair,  and  Hall,  even  if  it  had 
not  been  completely  solved  by  Desmarest,  Von  Buch,  and 
D'Aubuisson  on  the  Continent.  But  the  advent  of  Jameson 

1  See,  for  instance,  the  way  in  which  he  dismisses  the  observations  of 
Faujas  de  St.  Fond  on  Scottish  rocks,  and  the  unhesitating  declaration 
that  there  is  not  in  all  Scotland  the  vestige  of  a  volcano. — Mineralogy 
of  the  Scottish  Isles  (1800),  p.  5.  He  never  looses  an  opportunity  of  a 
sneer  at  the  "  Vulcanists  "  and  "fire-philosophers." 

0 


1 94  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

rekindled  the  old  fires  of  controversy.  The  sections 
around  Edinburgh,  which  display  such  admirable  illustra- 
tions of  eruptive  rocks,  were  confidently  appealed  to  alike 
by  the  Vulcanists  and  the  Neptunists.  Jameson  carried 
his  students  to  Salisbury  Crags  and  Arthur  Seat,  and 
there  demonstrated  to  them  that  the  so-called  igneous 
rocks  were  manifestly  merely  chemical  precipitates  in  the 
"Independent  Coal  formation."  The  Huttonians  were 
glad  to  conduct  any  interested  stranger  to  the  very  same 
sections  to  prove  that  the  whinstone  was  an  igneous 
intrusion.  There  is  a  characteristic  anecdote  told  of  one 
of  these  excursions  by  Dr.  Fitton  in  the  Edinburgh 
Eeview.  One  of  the  Irish  upholders  of  the  aqueous  origin 
of  basalt,  Dr.  Eichardson,  had  attained  some  notoriety 
from  having  found  fossils  in  what  he  called  basalt  at 
Portrush,  on  the  coast  of  Antrim.  His  discovery  was 
eagerly  quoted  by  those  who  maintained  the  aqueous 
origin  of  that  rock,  and  though  eventually  Playfair  showed 
that  the  fossils  really  lie  in  Lias  shale  which  has  been 
baked  into  a  flinty  condition  by  an  intrusive  basaltic 
sheet,  this  explanation  was  not  accepted  by  the  other 
side,  and  the  fossiliferous  basalt  of  Antrim  continued  to 
be  cited  as  an  indubitable  fact  by  the  zealous  partizans  of 
Werner.  While  these  were  still  matters  of  controversy 
Dr.  Eichardson  of  Portrush  paid  a  visit  to  Scotland,  chiefly 
with  reference  to  fiorin  grass,  in  which  he  was  interested. 
The  writer  in  the  Edinburgh  Eeview  was  asked,  he  tells 
us,  by  Sir  James  Hall,  to  meet  Dr.  Hope  and  the  Irish 
geologist.  "  It  was  arranged  that  the  party  should  go  to 
Salisbury  Crags,  to  show  Dr.  Eichardson  a  junction  of 
the  sandstone  with  the  trap,  which  was  regarded  as  an 


iv  Opponents  of  Hutton  s  Doctrines         195 

instructive  example  of  that  class  of  facts.  After  reaching 
the  spot,  Sir  James  pointed  out  the  great  disturbance  that 
had  taken  place  at  the  junction,  and  particularly  called 
the  attention  of  the  doctor  to  a  piece  of  sandstone  which 
had  been  whirled  up  during  the  convulsion  and  enclosed 
in  the  trap.  When  Sir  James  had  finished  his  lecture, 
the  doctor  did  not  attempt  to  explain  the  facts  before  him 
on  any  principle  of  his  own,  nor  did  he  recur  to  the 
shallow  evasion  of  regarding  the  enclosed  sandstone  as 
contemporaneous  with  the  trap  ;  but  he  burst  out  into  the 
strongest  expressions  of  contemptuous  surprise  that  a 
theory  of  the  earth  should  be  founded  on  such  small  and 
trivial  appearances!  He  had  been  accustomed,  he  said, 
to  look  at  Nature  in  her  grandest  aspects,  and  to  trace  her 
hand  in  the  gigantic  cliffs  of  the  Irish  coast ;  and  he  could 
not  conceive  how  opinions  thus  formed  could  be  shaken 
by  such  minute  irregularities  as  those  which  had  been 
shown  to  him.  The  two  Huttonian  philosophers  were 
confounded  ;  and,  if  we  recollect  rightly,  the  weight  of 
an  acre  of  fiorin  and  the  number  of  bullocks  it  would 
feed  formed  the  remaining  subjects  of  conversation." l 

It  is  not  needful  to  follow  into  further  detail  the  history 
of  the  opposition  encountered  by  the  Huttonian  theory  of 
the  earth.  Some  of  the  bitterest  antagonists  of  Hutton 
hailed  from  Ireland.  Besides  Eichardson,  with  his  fossili- 
ferous  basalt,  there  was  Kirwan,  President  of  the  Eoyal 
Irish  Academy,  whose  ungenerous  attacks  stung  Hutton 
into  the  preparation  of  his  larger  treatise.  In  England 
and  on  the  Continent  another  determined  opponent  was 
found  in  the  versatile  and  prolific  De  Luc.  But  though 
1  Edinburgh  Review ',  No.  Ixv.  1837,  p.  9. 


196  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

these  men  wielded  great  influence  in  their  day,  their 
writings  have  fallen  into  deserved  oblivion.  They  are 
never  read  save  by  the  curious  student,  who  has  leisure 
and  inclination  to  dig  among  the  cemeteries  of  geological 
literature. 

The  gradual  decay  of  Wernerianism  is  well  indicated 
by  the  eight  volumes  of  Memoirs  published  by  Jameson's 
Wernerian  Society,  which  ranged  from  1811  to  1839,  an 
interval  of  less  than  a  generation.  The  early  numbers 
might  have  emanated  from  Freiberg  itself.  Not  a  senti- 
ment is  to  be  found  in  them  of  which  Werner  himself 
would  not  have  approved.  How  heartily,  for  example, 
Jameson  must  have  welcomed  the  concluding  sentence  of 
a  paper  by  one  of  the  ablest  of  his  associates  when,  after  a 
not  very  complimentary  allusion  to  Button's  views  about 
central  heat,  the  remark  is  made — "  He  who  has  the  bold- 
ness to  build  a  theory  of  the  earth  without  a  knowledge  of 
the  natural  history  of  rocks,  will  daily  meet  with  facts  to 
puzzle  and  mortify  him."  *  The  fate  which  this  complacent 
Wernerian  here  predicted  for  the  followers  of  Hutton,  was 
now  surely  and  steadily  overtaking  his  own  brethren. 
One  by  one  the  faithful  began  to  fail,  and  those  who  had 
gone  out  to  preach  the  faith  of  Freiberg  came  back  con- 
vinced of  its  errors,  and  of  the  truth  of  much  which  they 
had  held  up  to  scorn  in  the  tenets  of  Hutton.  Even 
among  Jameson's  own  students,  defections  began  to  appear. 
His  friends  might  translate  into  English,  and  publish  at 
Edinburgh,  tracts  of  the  most  orthodox  Wernerianism,  such 
as  Werner's  Treatise  on  Veins,  or  Von  Buch's  Description  of 
Landeck,  or  D'Aubuisson's  Basalts  of  Saxony.  But  his 

1  The  Rev.  John  Fleming,  Mem.  Wer.  Soc.  vol.  ii.  (1813),  p.  154. 


iv  Decay  of  Wernerianism  197 

pupils,  who  went  farther  afield,  who  came  into  contact 
with  the  distinct  current  of  opposition  to  some  of  the 
doctrines  of  the  Freiberg  school  that  was  now  setting  in 
on  the  Continent,  who  set  themselves  seriously  to  study 
the  Huttonian  theory,  and  who  found  at  every  turn  facts 
that  could  not  be  fitted  into  the  system  of  Freiberg, 
gradually,  though  often  very  reluctantly,  went  over  to  the 
opposite  camp.  Men  like  Ami  Boue  would  send  him 
notes  of  their  travels  full  of  what  a  devout  Wernerian 
could  not  but  regard  as  the  rankest  heresy.1  But  Jameson 
with  great  impartiality  printed  these  in  the  Society's 
publications.  And  so  by  degrees  the  Memoirs  of  the 
Wernerian  Society  ceased  to  bear  any  trace  of  Wernerian- 
ism, and  contained  papers  of  which  any  Huttonian  might 
have  been  proud  to  be  the  author.2 

So  long  as  Werner  lived,  however,  his  school  remained 
predominant.  Loyalty  to  their  master  kept  his  pupils 
from  openly  rejecting  his  doctrines,  even  when  they  could 
no  longer  accept  them.  His  death  in  1817  was  felt  to 
bring  a  relief  from  the  despotism  which  he  had  so  long 
exercised.3  And  from  that  time  his  system  began  rapidly 
to  decline  in  favour  even  in  Germany. 

But  even  while  Werner  was  in  the  full  meridian  of  his 
influence,  various  observers  in  Europe,  in  addition  to  Von 
Buch  and  D'Aubuisson,  without  definitely  becoming  con- 

1  See  Mem,.  Wer.  Soc.  vol.  iv.  (1822),  p.  91. 

2  See  for  example  the  excellent  papers  by  Hay  Cunningham  in  vols. 
vii.  and  viii. 

3  One  of  Jameson's  ablest  pupils,  Ami  Boue",  trained  in  the  "Wernerian 
faith,  confessed,  but  with  evident  reluctance,  and   "as  a  truth  which 
others  may  be  unwilling  to  make  public,"  that  Werner's  death  had  greatly 
contributed  to  the  progress  of  geology  in  Germany. — Journ.  Phys.  xciv. 
(1822),  p.  298. 


198  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

troversialists,  were  providing  a  large  body  of  material  which 
eventually  proved  of  great  service  in  the  establishment  of  a 
sound  geology.  Chief  among  them  were  those  who  devoted 
themselves  with  such  ardour  to  the  study  of  the  Italian 
volcanoes.  One  of  the  most  active  and  interesting  of  them 
was  the  Frenchman  Dolomieu  (1750-1801),  who  died  at 
the  early  age  of  fifty-one,  after  a  strangely  eventful  life.  He 
travelled  much  and  wrote  largely,  specially  devoting  his 
attention  to  the  active  and  extinct  volcanoes  of  the  Medi- 
terranean. As  far  back  as  1783  he  published  a  little 
volume  on  the  Lipari  Isles.  Afterwards  he  followed 
Desmarest  in  describing  the  old  volcanoes  of  Auvergne.1 
Though  his  theoretical  views  were  not  always  sound,  he 
was  a  careful  and  indefatigable  observer,  and  provided 
copious  material  towa,rds  the  establishment  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  geology.  To  him  more  than  perhaps  to  any  of 
his  contemporaries  is  science  indebted  for  recognizing  and 
enforcing  the  connection  of  volcanoes  with  the  internal 
heat  of  the  globe. 

Faujas  de  St.  Fond  (1742-1819)  did  excellent  service  by 
his  splendid  folio  on  the  old  volcanoes  of  the  Vivarais  and 
the  Velay — a  work  lavishly  illustrated  with  engravings, 
which,  by  showing  so  clearly  the  association  of  columnar 
lavas  with  unmistakable  volcanic  cones,  ought  to  have  done 
much  to  arrest  the  progress  of  the  Freiberg  doctrine  of  the 
aqueous  origin  of  basalt.2  The  same  good  observer  under- 
took a  journey  into  the  Western  Isles  of  Scotland  towards 
the  end  of  last  century,3  when  that  region  was  much  less 

1  Journ.  des  Mines,  vol.  vii.  (1798),  pp.  393-405. 

2  HechercTies  sur  Us  Volcans  faints  du  Vivarais  et  du  Velay,  folio,  1778. 

3  Voyage  en  Angleterre,  en  ficosse,  et  aux  lies  Hebrides,  2  vols.  8vo. 
1797. 


IV 


Spallanzani,  Breislak  199 

easily  visited  than  it  now  is,  and  convinced  himself  of  the 
volcanic  origin  of  the  basalts  there,  thus  adding  another  im- 
portant contribution  to  the  literature  of  volcanic  geology. 

Spallanzani  (1729-1799),  the  illustrious  professor  of 
Pa  via,  Eeggio,  and  Modena,  born  as  far  back  as  172  9,  devoted 
his  earlier  life  to  animal  and  vegetable  physiology,  and  was 
fifty  years  of  age  before  he  began  to  turn  his  attention 
to  geological  questions.  But  from  that  period  onward  he 
made  many  journeys  in  the  basin  of  the  Mediterranean 
from  Constantinople  to  Marseilles.  Of  especial  interest 
were  his  minute  .and  picturesque  descriptions  of  the 
eruptions  of  Stromboli,  which  at  not  a  little  personal  risk 
he  watched  from  a  crevice  in  the  lava.  His  Travels  in  the 
Two  Sicilies  and  in  some  Parts  of  the  Apennines  contained 
a  vast  assemblage  of  careful  observations  among  the  recent 
and  extinct  volcanoes  of  Italy.1 

Another  Italian  geologist,  Scipio  Breislak  (1748-1826), 
did  good  service  in  making  known  the  volcanic  phenomena 
of  his  native  country,  and  in  publishing  two  general 
treatises  on  geology,  in  which  he  ranged  himself  among 
the  Vulcanists.  "  I  respect,"  he  wrote,  "  the  standard 
raised  by  Werner,  but  the  flag  of  the  marvellous  and 
mysterious  will  never  be  that  which  I  shall  choose  to 
follow."2 

The  days  of  mere  theorizing  in  the  cabinet  or  the  study 
had  now  passed  away.  Everywhere  there  was  aroused  a 
spirit  of  inquiry  into  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  earth 

1  Viaggi  alle  due  Sicilie,  1792-93. 

2  Introduzione  alia  Geologia,  2  vols.  8vo,  1811,  translated  into  French, 
1  vol.  1812.    Breislak  was  the  author  of  a  valuable  treatise  on  the  physical 
and  lithological  topography  of  Campania,  and  of  other  works  on  Italian 
and  general  geology. 


2OO  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT.  iv 

itself  as  to  its  history.  The  main  theoretical  principles  of 
the  science  had  been  established,  but  there  remained  to  be 
discovered  and  applied  the  fruitful  doctrine  of  stratigraphy. 
How  this  doctrine,  which  has  done  more  than  any  other 
for  the  progress  of  geological  investigation,  was  developed 
will  be  the  subject  of  the  next  lecture. 


LECTUEE  V 

The  rise  of  stratigraphical  geology — The  work  of  Giraud-Soulavie, 
Cuvier,  Brongniart  and  Omalius  d'Halloy  in  France ;  the 
labours  of  Michell  and  William  Smith  in  England. 

THAT  the  rocks  around  and  beneath  us  contain  the  record 
of  terrestrial  revolutions  before  the  establishment  of  the 
present  dry  land,  was  an  idea  clearly  present  to  the  minds 
of  the  early  Italian  geologists,  and  was  generally  admitted, 
before  the  end  of  last  century,  by  all  who  interested  them- 
selves in  minerals  and  rocks.  The  Neptunists  and  Vulcan- 
ists  might  dispute  vigorously  over  their  respective  creeds, 
but  they  all  agreed  in  maintaining  the  doctrine  of  a 
geological  succession.  Werner  made  this  doctrine  a 
cardinal  part  of  his  system,  and  brought  it  into  greater 
prominence  than  it  had  ever  held  before  his  time.  His 
sequence  of  formations  from  granite,  at  the  base,  to  the 
youngest  river-gravel  or  sea-formed  silt  betokened,  in  his 
view,  a  gradual  development  of  deposits,  which  began  with 
the  chemical  precipitates  of  a  universal  ocean,  and  ended 
with  the  modern  mechanical  and  other  accumulations  of 
terrestrial  surfaces,  as  well  as  of  the  sea-floor.  But,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  lithological  characters  on  which  he  based 
the  discrimination  of  his  various  formations  proved  to  be 
unreliable.  Granite  was  soon  found  not  always  to  lie  at 


2O2  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  bottom.  Basalt,  at  first  placed  by  him  among  the 
oldest  formations,  turned  up  incontinently  among  the 
youngest.  He  and  his  disciples  were  consequently  obliged 
to  alter  and  patch  the  Freiberg  system,  till  it  lost  its 
simplicity  and  self-consistence,  and  was  still  as  far  as  ever 
from  corresponding  with  the  complex  order  which  nature 
had  followed.  Obviously  the  Wernerian  school  had  not 
found  the  key  to  the  problem,  though  it  had  done  service 
in  showing  how  far  a  lithological  sequence  could  be  traced 
among  the  oldest  rocks. 

Button's  views  on  this  question  were  in  some  respects 
even  less  advanced  than  Werner's.  He  realized,  as  no  one 
had  ever  done  before  him,  the  evidence  for  the  universal 
decay  of  the  land.  At  the  same  time,  he  perceived  that 
unless  some  compensating  agency  came  into  play,  the 
whole  of  the  dry  land  must  eventually  be  washed  into  the 
sea.  The  upturned  condition  of  the  Primary  strata,  which 
had  once  been  formed  under  the  sea,  furnished  him  with 
proofs  that  in  past  time  the  sea-floor  has  been  upheaved 
into  land.  Without  invoking  any  fanciful  theory,  he 
planted  his  feet  firmly  on  these  two  classes  of  facts,  which 
could  be  fully  demonstrated.  To  his  mind  the  earth 
revealed  no  trace  of  a  beginning,  no  prospect  of  an  end. 
All  that  he  could  see  was  the  evidence  of  a  succession  of 
degradations  and  upheavals,  by  which  the  balance  of  sea 
and  land  and  the  habitable  condition  of  our  globe  were 
perpetuated.  Hutton  was  unable  to  say  how  many  of 
these  revolutions  may  be  chronicled  among  the  rocks  of 
the  earth's  crust.1  Nor  did  he  discover  any  method  by 

1  Playfair  thought  that  the  revolutions  may  have  been  often  repeated, 
and  that  our  present  continents  appear  to  be  the  third  in  succession,  of 
which  relics  may  be  observed  among  the  rocks. —  Works,  vol.  iv.  p.  55. 


v  Rise  of  Stratigraphical  Geology          203 

which  their  general  sequence  over  the  whole  globe  could 
be  determined. 

A  totally  new  pathway  of  investigation  had  now  to  be 
opened  up.  The  part  that  had  hitherto  been  played  by 
species  of  minerals  and  rocks  was  henceforth  to  be  taken 
by  species  of  plants  and  animals.  Organic  remains, 
imbedded  in  the  strata  of  the  earth's  crust,  had  been 
abundantly  appealed  to  as  evidence  of  the  former  presence 
of  the  sea  upon  the  land,  or  as  proofs  of  upheaval  of  the 
sea-floor.  But  they  were  now  to  receive  far  closer  atten- 
tion, until  they  were  found  to  contain  the  key  to  geological 
history,  and  to  furnish  a  basis  by  which  the  past  revolu- 
tions of  the  globe  could  be  chronologically  arranged  and 
accurately  described. 

Apart  altogether  from  questions  of  cosmogony  or  of 
geological  theory,  some  of  the  broad  facts  of  stratigraphy 
could  not  but,  at  an  early  time,  attract  attention.  In 
regions  of  little-disturbed  sedimentary  rocks,  the  super- 
position of  distinct  strata,  one  upon  another,  was  too  obvious 
to  escape  notice.  A  little  travel  and  observant  eyes 
would  enable  men  to  see  that  the  same  kinds  of  strata, 
accompanied  by  the  same  topographical  characters,  ranged 
from  district  to  district,  across  wide  regions.  We  have 
found  that  it  was  in  countries  of  regular  and  gently- 
inclined  stratified  rocks  that  Lehmann  and  Fuchsel  made 
their  observations,  which  paved  the  way  for  the  develop- 
ment of  the  idea  of  geological  succession.  We  have  now  to 
trace  the  growth  of  this  idea,  and  the  discovery  that  organic 
remains  furnish  the  clue  to  the  relative  chronology  of  the 
strata  in  which  they  are  imbedded. 

There  were  two  regions  of  Europe  well  fitted  to  furnish 


2O4  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

any  observant  inquirer  with  the  means  of  establishing 
this  supremely  important  section  of  modern  geology.  In 
France,  the  Secondary  and  Tertiary  formations  lie  in  un- 
disturbed succession,  one  above  another,  over  hundreds 
of  square  miles.  They  come  to  the  surface,  not  obscured 
under  superficial  deposits,  but  projecting  their  escarpments 
to  the  day,  and  showing,  by  their  topographical  contours, 
the  sharply  defined  limits  of  their  several  groups.  Again, 
in  England,  the  same  formations  cover  the  southern  and 
eastern  parts  of  the  country,  displaying  everywhere 
the  same  clear  evidence  of  their  arrangement.  Let  us 
trace  the  progress  of  discovery  in  each  of  these  regions. 
To  a  large  extent  this  progress  was  simultaneous,  but  there 
is  no  evidence  that  the  earlier  workers  in  the  one  country 
were  aware  of  what  was  being  done  in  the  other. 

To  the  Abbe*  Giraud-Soulavie  (1752-1813)  the  merit 
must  be  assigned  of  having  planted  the  first  seeds  from  which 
the  magnificent  growth  of  stratigraphical  geology  in  France 
has  sprung.  Among  other  works,  he  wrote  a  Natural 
History  of  Southern  France  in  seven  volumes,  of  which  the 
first  two  appeared  in  the  year  1780.  He  gave  much  of  his 
attention  to  the  old  volcanoes  of  his  native  country,  and 
devoted  several  of  his  volumes  entirely  to  their  description. 
But  his  chief  claim  to  notice  here  lies  in  a  particular 
chapter  of  his  work  which,  he  tells  us,  was  read  before  the 
Royal  Academy  of  Sciences  of  Paris  on  14th  August 
1779.1  In  describing  the  calcareous  mountains  of  the 
Vivarais,  he  divides  the  limestones  into  five  epochs  or 
ages,  the  strata  in  each  of  which  are  marked  by  a  distinct 

1  Histoire  Naturelle  de  la  France  Mdridionale,  tome  i.  2rae  partie,  chap, 
viii.  p.  317. 


Giraud-Soulavie  205 


assemblage  of  fossil  shells.  The  first  of  these  ages,  he 
declared,  was  represented  by  limestone  containing  organic 
remains  with  no  living  analogues,  such  as  ammonites, 
belemnites,  terebratulae,  gryphites,  etc.  Having  no  more 
ancient  strata  in  the  district,  the  Abbe  called  this  oldest 
limestone  primordial.  His  second  age  was  indicated  by 
limestone,  in  which  the  fossils  of  the  preceding  epoch  were 
still  found,  but  associated  with  some  others  now  living  in 
our  seas.  Among  the  new  forms  of  life  that  appeared  in 
these  secondary  strata  he  enumerated  chamas,  mussels, 
comb-shells,  nautili,  etc.  These,  he  said,  inhabited  the 
sea,  together  with  survivors  from  the  first  age,  but  the 
latter  at  the  end  of  the  second  age  disappeared.  Above 
their  remains  other  races  established  themselves,  and 
carried  on  the  succession  of  organized  beings. 

The  third  age  was  one  in  which  the  shells  were  oi 
recent  forms,  with  descendants  that  inhabit  our  present 
seas.  The  remains  of  these  shells  were  found  in  a  soft 
white  limestone,  but  not  a  trace  of  ammonite,  belemnite, 
or  gryphite  was  to  be  seen  associated  with  them.  Among 
the  organisms  named  by  the  Abbe  were  limpets,  whelks, 
volutes,  oysters,  sea-urchins,  and  others,  the  number  of 
species  increasing  with  the  comparative  recentness  of  the 
formation.  He  thought  that  the  most  ancient  deposits 
had  been  accumulated  at  the  highest  levels,  when  the  sea 
covered  the  whole  region,  and  that,  as  the  waters  sank, 
successively  younger  formations  were  laid  down  at  lower 
and  lower  levels. 

From  the  occurrence  of  worn  pebbles  of  basalt  in  the 
third  limestone,  Giraud-Soulavie  inferred  that  volcanic 
eruptions  had  preceded  that  formation,  and  that  an 


206  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

enormous  duration  of  time  was  indicated  by  the  erosion  of 
the  lavas  of  these  volcanoes,  and  the  transport  and  deposit 
of  their  detritus  in  the  white  limestone. 

The  fourth  age  in  the  Vivarais  was  represented  by  cer- 
tain carbonaceous  shales  or  slates,  containing  the  remains 
of  primordial  vegetation  to  which  it  was  difficult  to  dis- 
cover the  modern  analogues.  Giraud-Soulavie  believed 
that  he  could  observe  among  these  slates  a  succession  of 
organic  remains  similar  to  that  displayed  by  the  lime- 
stones, those  strata  which  lay  on  the  oldest  marble  con- 
taining ammonites,  while  the  most  recent  enclosed,  but  only 
rarely,  unknown  plants  mingled  with  known  forms.  It 
would  thus  appear  that  the  deposits  of  the  so-called  fourth 
age  were  more  or  less  equivalents  of  those  of  the  three 
calcareous  ages. 

The  fifth  age  was  characterized  by  deposits  of  conglom- 
erate and  modern  alluvium,  containing  fossil  trees,  together 
with  bones  and  teeth  of  elephants  and  other  animals.  "  Such 
is  the  general  picture,"  the  Abbe*  remarks,  "  presented  by 
our  old  hills  of  the  Vivarais,  and  of  the  modern  plains 
around  them.  The  progress  of  time  and,  above  all,  of 
increased  observation  will  augment  the  number  of  epochs 
which  I  have  given,  and  fill  up  the  blanks  ;  but  they  will 
not  change  the  relative  places  which  I  have  assigned  to 
these  epochs." 1  He  felt  confident  that  if  the  facts  observed 
by  him  in  the  Vivarais  were  confirmed  in  other  regions,  a 
historical  chronology  of  fossil  and  living  organisms  would 
be  established  on  a  basis  of  incontestible  truth.  In  his 
last  volume,  replying  to  some  objections  made  to  his 
opinions  regarding  the  succession  of  animals  in  time,  he 

1  Op.  tit.  p.  350. 


Giraud-Soulavie  207 


contends  that  the  difference  between  the  fossils  of  different 
countries  is  due  not  to  a  geographical  but  to  a  chrono- 
logical cause.  "The  sea,"  he  says,  "produces  no  more 
ammonites,  because  these  shells  belong  to  older  periods  or 
other  climates.  The  difference  between  the  shells  in  the 
rocks  rests  on  the  difference  in  their  relative  antiquity,  and 
not  on  mere  local  causes.  If  an  earthquake  were  to  sub- 
merge the  ammonite-bearing  rocks  of  the  Vivarais  beneath 
the  Mediterranean,  the  sea  returning  to  its  old  site  would 
not  bring  back  its  old  shells.  The  course  of  time  has 
destroyed  the  species,  and  they  are  no  longer  to  be  found 
in  the  more  recent  rocks."  x 

The  sagacity  of  these  views  will  at  once  be  acknowledged. 
Yet  they  seem  to  have  made  no  way  either  in  France  or 
elsewhere.  The  worthy  Abbe,  though  a  good  observer  and 
a  logical  reasoner,  was  a  singularly  bad  writer.  At  the 
end  of  the  eighteenth  century  a  wretched  style  was 
an  unpardonable  offence  •  even  in  a  man  of  science.2 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  cause,  Giraud-Soulavie  has 
fallen  into  the  background.  His  fame  has  been  eclipsed, 
even  in  France,  by  the  more  brilliant  work  of  his  successors. 
Yet,  in  any  general  survey  of  geological  progress,  it  is 
only  just  to  acknowledge  how  firmly  he  had  grasped  some 
of  the  fundamental  truths  of  stratigraphical  geology,  at  a 
time  when  the  barren  controversy  about  the  origin  of 
basalt  was  the  main  topic  of  geological  discussion  through- 
out Europe. 

We  have  seen  that  the  distinctness,  regularity,  and 
persistence  of  the  outcrops  of  the  various  geological  for- 

1  Op.  cit.  tome  vii.  (1784),  p.  157. 
2  D'Archiac,  Geologic  et  Paldontologie,  1866,  p.  145. 


208  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

inations  of  the  Paris  basin  suggested  to  Guettard  the  first 
idea  of  depicting  on  maps  the  geographical  distribution  of 
rocks  and  minerals.  The  same  region  and  the  same  features 
of  topography  and  structure  inspired  long  afterwards  a 
series  of  researches  that  contributed  in  large  measure  to 
the  establishment  of  the  principles  of  geological  strati- 
graphy. No  fitter  birthplace  could  be  found  in  Europe 
for  the  rise  of  this  great  department  of  science.  Around 
the  capital  of  France,  the  Tertiary  and  Secondary  forma- 
tions are  ranged  in  orderly  sequence,  group  emerging  from 
under  group,  to  the  far  confines  of  Brittany  on  the  west, 
the  hills  of  the  Ardennes  and  the  Vosges  on  the  east, 
and  the  central  plateau  on  the  south.  Not  only  is  the 
succession  of  the  strata  clear,  but  their  abundant 
fossils  furnish  a  most  complete  basis  for  stratigraphical 
arrangement  and  comparison. 

Various  observers  had  been  struck  with  the  orderly 
sequence  of  rocks  in  this  classic  region.  Desmarest  tells 
us  that  the  chemist  Eouelle  was  so  impressed  with  its 
symmetry  of  structure  that,  though  he  never  wrote  any- 
thing on  the  subject,  he  used  to  discourse  on  it  to  his 
students  at  the  Jardin  des  Plantes,  of  whom  Desmarest 
himself  appears  to  have  been  one.  He  would  enlarge  to 
them  upon  the  significance  of  the  masses  of  shells  im- 
bedded in  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  surface,  pointing  out 
that  these  rocks  were  not  disposed  at  random,  as  had  been 
supposed.  He  saw  that  the  shells  were  not  the  same  in 
all  regions,  that  certain  forms  were  always  found  associ- 
ated together,  while  others  were  never  to  be  met  with  in 
the  same  strata  or  layers.  He  noticed,  as  Guettard  had 
done  before  him,  that  in  some  districts  the  fossil  shells 


v  Rouelle,  Lamanon  209 

were  grouped  in  exactly  the  same  kind  of  arrangement 
and  distribution  as  on  the  floor  of  the  present  sea — a  fact 
which,  in  his  eyes,  disproved  the  notion  that  these  marine 
organisms  had  been  brought  together  by  some  violent 
deluge ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  showed  that  the  present 
land  had  once  been  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  and  had  been 
laid  dry  by  some  revolution  that  took  place  without  pro- 
ducing any  disturbance  of  the  strata.  Kouelle  recognized 
a  constant  order  in  the  arrangement  of  the  shells.  Thus, 
immediately  around  Paris,  he  found  certain  strata  to  be 
full  of  screw  shells  (Turritella,  CeritJiium,  etc.),  and  to 
extend  to  Chaumont,  on  the  one  side,  and  to  Courtagnon 
near  Eheims,  on  the  other.  He  pointed  to  a  second 
deposit,  or  "mass"  as  he  called  it,  full  of  belemnites, 
ammonites,  gryphites,  etc.  (Jurassic),  forming  a  long  and 
broad  band  outside  the  eastern  border  of  the  Chalk,  and 
stretching  north  and  south  beyond  that  formation  up  ~bo 
the  old  rocks  of  the  Morvan.  Desmarest's  account  of  his 
teacher's  opinion  was  published  in  the  third  year  of  the 
Eepublic.1  It  is  thus  evident  that  Eouelle  had  formed 
remarkably  correct  views  of  the  general  stratigraphy  of 
the  Paris  basin  probably  long  before  1794. 

Desmarest  himself  published  many  valuable  observa- 
tions regarding  the  rocks  of  the  Paris  basin  in  separate 
articles  in  his  great  GttograpMe  Physique.  Lam  anon  had 
written  on  the  gypsum  deposits  of  the  region,  which  he 
regarded  as  marking  the  sites  of  former  lakes,  and  from 
which  he  described  and  figured  the  remains  of  mammals, 
birds  and  fishes.  Noting  the  alternations  of  gypsum  and 

1  Geographic  Physique  (Encyclopedic  Methodique),  tome  i.  (1794),  pp. 
409-431. 

P 


2io  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

marls,  he  traced  what  he  believed  to  be  the  limits  of 
the  sheets  of  freshwater  in  which  they  were  successively 
deposited.  Still  more  precise  was  the  grouping  adopted 
by  Lavoisier.  This  great  man,  who,  if  he  had  not  given 
himself  up  to  chemistry,  might  have  become  one  of  the 
most  illustrious  among  the  founders  of  geology,  was,  as 
you  will  remember,  associated  early  in  life  with  Guettard 
in  the  construction  of  mineralogical  maps  of  France.  As 
far  back  as  the  year  1*789,  he  distinguished  between  what 
he  called  littoral  banks  and  pelagic  banks,  which  were 
formed  at  different  distances  from  the  land,  and  were 
marked  by  distinct  kinds  of  sediment  and  peculiar  organ- 
isms. He  thought  that  the  different  strata,  in  such  a 
basin  as  that  of  the  Seine,  pointed  to  very  slow  oscilla- 
tions of  the  level  of  the  sea,  and  he  believed  that  a  section 
of  all  the  stratified  deposits  between  the  coasts  and  the 
mountains  would  furnish  an  alternation  of  littoral  and 
pelagic  banks,  and  would  reveal  by  the  number  of  strata 
the  number  of  excursions  made  by  the  waters  of  the 
ocean.  Lavoisier  accompanied  his  essay  with  sections 
which  gave  the  first  outline  of  a  correct  classification  of 
the  Tertiary  deposits  of  the  Paris  region.  His  sketch  was 
imperfect,  but  it  represented  in  their  true  sequence  the 
white  Chalk  supporting  the  Plastic  Clay,  lower  sands, 
Calcaire  Grossier,  upper  sands  and  upper  lacustrine  lime- 
stone.1 

A  few  years  later,  a  still  more  perfect  classification  of 
the    Tertiary   deposits   around   Paris  was   published  by 

1  M6m.  Acad.  Roy.  Sciences  (1789),  p.  350,  pi.  7.  This  memoir  of 
Lavoisier  on  modern  horizontal  strata  and  their  disposition  is  fully 
noticed  by  Desmarest  in  the  first  volume  of  his  Geographic  Physique, 
p.  783. 


Ciwier  211 


Coupe",  but  without  sufficiently  detailed  observations  to 
convince  his  contemporaries  that  the  work  was  wholly 
reliable.1 

It  was  not  until  the  year  1808  that  the  Tertiary  strati- 
graphy of  the  basin  of  the  Seine  was  worked  out  in  some 
detail,  and  that  a  foundation  was  thereby  furnished  for  the 
establishment  of  a  general  system  of  stratigraphical  geology 
in  France.  The  task  was  accomplished  by  two  men  who 
have  left  their  mark  upon  the  history  of  the  science, 
Cuvier  and  Brongniart. 

Georges  Chre'tien  Leopold  Dagobert  Cuvier  (1769-1832) 
came  of  an  old  Protestant  family  in  the  Jura  which  in  the 
sixteenth  century  had  fled  from  persecution  and  settled  at 
Montbeliard,  then  the  chief  town  of  a  little  principality 
belonging  to  the  Duke  of  Wiirtemberg.  He  was  born  at 
that  place  on  23rd  August  1769,  and  after  a  singularly 
brilliant  career  at  school  and  at  the  Caroline  Academy  of 
Stuttgart,  became  tutor  in  a  Normandy  family  living 
near  Fecamp.  He  had  been  drawn  into  the  study  of 
natural  history,  when  a  mere  child,  by  looking  over  the 
pages  of  Buffon,  and  had  with  much  ardour  taken  to  the 
observation  of  insects  and  plants.  In  Normandy,  the 
treasures  of  the  sea  were  opened  to  him.  Gradually  his 
dissections  and  descriptions,  though  not  published,  came  to 
the  notice  of  some  of  the  leading  naturalists  of  France,  and 
he  was  eventually  induced  to  come  to  Paris,  where,  after 
filling  various  appointments,  he  was  elected  to  the  chair  of 
Comparative  Anatomy  in  1795. 

Cuvier's  splendid  career  belongs  mainly  to  the  history 
of  biology.  We  are  only  concerned  here  in  noting  how  he 

1  Journ.  de  Physique,  tome  lix.  (1804),  pp.  161-176. 


212  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

came  to  be  interested  in  geological  questions.  He  tells 
himself  that  some  Terebratulce  from  the  rocks  at  Fecamp 
suggested  to  him  the  idea  of  comparing  the  fossil  forms 
with  living  organisms.  When  he  settled  in  Paris,  he 
pursued  this  idea,  never  losing  an  opportunity  of  studying 
the  fossils  to  be  found  in  the  different  collections.  He 
began  by  gathering  together  as  large  a  series  as  he  could 
obtain  of  skeletons  of  living  species  of  vertebrate  animals, 
as  a  basis  for  the  comparison  and  determination  of  extinct 
forms.  As  a  first  essay  in  the  new  domain  which  he  was 
to  open  up  to  science,  he  read  to  the  Institute,  at  the 
beginning  of  1796,  a  memoir  in  which  he  demonstrated 
that  the  fossil  elephant  belonged  to  a  different  species 
from  either  of  the  living  forms.  Two  years  later,  having 
had  a  few  bones  brought  to  him  from  the  gypsum  quarries 
of  Montmartre,  he  saw  that  they  indicated  some  quite 
unknown  animals.  Further  research  qualified  him  to 
reconstruct  the  skeletons,  and  to  demonstrate  their  entire 
difference,  both  specifically  and  generically,  from  any  known 
creatures  of  the  world  of  to-day.  He  was  thus  enabled  to 
announce  the  important  conclusion  that  the  globe  was  once 
peopled  by  vertebrate  animals  which,  in  the  course  of  the 
revolutions  of  its  surface,  have  entirely  disappeared. 

These  discoveries,  so  remarkable  in  themselves,  could 
not  but  suggest  many  further  inquiries  to  a  mind  so 
penetrating  and  philosophical  as  that  of  Cuvier.  He 
narrates  how  he  was  pursued  and  haunted  by  a  desire  to 
know  why  these  extinct  forms  disappeared,  and  how  they 
had  come  to  be  succeeded  by  others.  It  was  at  this  point 
that  he  entered  upon  the  special  domain  of  geology.  He 
found  that  besides  studying  the  fossil  bones  in  the  cabinet 


v  Alexandre  Brongniart  213 

it  was  needful  to  understand,  in  the  field,  the  conditions 
under  which  they  have  been  entombed  and  preserved. 
He  had  himself  no  practical  acquaintance  with  the  structure 
and  relations  of  rocks,  but  he  was  fortunate  in  securing 
the  co-operation  of  a  man  singularly  able  to  supply  the 
qualifications  in  which  he  was  himself  deficient. 

Alexandre  Brongniart  (17*70-1847),  Cuvier's  associate, 
was  a  year  younger  than  the  great  anatomist,  having  been 
born  in  Paris  in  1770.  He  began  his  career  early  in  life  by 
endeavouring  to  improve  the  art  of  enamelling  in  France. 
Thereafter  he  served  in  the  medical  department  of  the  army 
until  he  was  attached  to  the  Corps  of  Mines  and  was 
made  director  of  the  famous  porcelain  factory  of  Sevres. 
He  had  long  given  his  attention  to  minerals  and  rocks,  and 
was  eventually  appointed  professor  of  mineralogy  at  the 
Museum  of  Natural  History.  But  his  tastes  led  him  also 
to  study  zoology.  Thus,  among  his  labours  in  this  field, 
he  worked  out  the  zoological  and  geological  relations  of 
Trilobites.  There  was  consequently  in  their  common  pur- 
suits, a  bond  of  union  between  the  two  observers.  They 
had  both  entered  upon  a  domain  that  was  as  yet  almost 
untrodden;  and  each  brought  with  him  knowledge  and 
experience  that  were  needful  to  the  other. 

Accordingly  they  engaged  in  a  series  of  researches  in 
the  basin  of  the  Seine  which  continued  for  some  years. 
Cuvier  relates  that  during  four  years  he  made  almost  every 
week  an  excursion  into  the  country  around  Paris,  for  the 
sake  of  studying  its  geological  structure.  Particular 
attention  was  given  to  two  features, — the  evidence  of  a 
definite  succession  among  the  strata,  and  the  distinction  of 
the  organic  remains  contained  in  them. 


214  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

At  last  the  results  of  these  investigations  were  embodied 
in  a  joint  memoir  by  Cuvier  and  Brongniart,  which  first 
appeared  in  the  year  1808.1 

They  seem  to  have  continued  their  researches  with 
great  industry  during  the  following  years.  An  account  of 
these  additional  observations  was  read  by  them  before  the 
Institute  in  April  1810,  and  was  published  as  a  separate 
work  with  a  map,  sections,  and  plate  of  fossils  in  181 1.2 
Kef erring  afterwards  to  this  conjoint  essay  and  its  subse- 
quent enlargement,  Cuvier  generously  wrote  that  though 
it  bore  his  name,  it  had  become  almost  entirely  the  pro- 
duction of  his  friend,  from  the  infinite  pains  which,  ever 
since  the  first  conception  of  their  plan,  and  during  their 
various  excursions,  he  had  bestowed  upon  the  thorough 
investigation  of  all  the  objects  of  the  inquiry,  and  in  the 
preparation  of  the  essay  itself.3  Brongniart's  experience 
as  a  mining  engineer  would  naturally  make  him  fitter  than 
Cuvier  for  the  requirements  of  stratigraphical  research. 

It  is  not  necessary  for  our  present  purpose  to  trace  the 
development  of  view  of  these  observers  during  the  three 
years  that  elapsed  between  the  appearance  of  their  first 
sketch  and  that  of  their  illustrated  quarto  memoir.  It 
will  be  enough  to  note  the  general  characters  of  their  first 
essay,  and  to  see  how  far  in  advance  it  was  of  anything 
that  had  preceded  it. 

After  briefly  describing  the  limits  and  general  features 
of  the  Seine  basin,  the  authors  proceed  to  show  that  the 

1  Journal  des  Mines,  tome  xxiii.  (1808),  p.  421. 

2  Essai  sur  la  Geographic  Mineralogique  des  Environs  de  Paris  avec 
une  Carte  gtognostique  et  des  Coupes  de  terrain,  4to,  1811.     An  enlarged 
edition  of  this  separate  work  appeared  in  1822. 

3  Discours  sur  les  Revolutions  de  la  Surface  du  Globe,  6th  edit.  p.  294. 


v        Joint  Work  of  Cuvier  and  Brongniart     215 

formations  which  they  have  to  consider  were  deposited  in 
a  vast  bay  or  lake,  of  which  the  shores  consisted  of  Chalk. 
They  point  out  that  the  deposits  took  place  in  a  definite 
order  and  could  be  easily  recognized  by  their  lithological 
and  palasontological  characters  throughout  the  district. 
They  classify  them  first  broadly  into  two  great  groups, 
which  they  afterwards  proceed  to  subdivide  into  minor 
sections.  The  first  of  these  groups,  covering  the  Chalk  of 
the  lower  grounds,  consisted  partly  of  the  plateau  of  lime- 
stone without  shells,  and  partly  of  the  abundantly  shell- 
bearing  Calcaire  Grossier.  The  second  group  comprised 
the  gypseo-marly  series,  not  found  uniformly  distributed, 
but  disposed  in  patches. 

Starting  from  the  Chalk  of  the  north  of  France,  the  two 
observers  succinctly  indicate  the  leading  characters  of  that 
deposit,  its  feeble  stratification  chiefly  marked  by  parallel 
layers  of  dark  flints,  the  varying  distances  of  these  layers 
from  each  other,  and  the  distinctive  fossils.  Putting 
together  the  organisms  they  had  themselves  collected,  and 
those  previously  obtained  by  Defrance,  they  could  speak 
of  fifty  species  of  organic  remains  known  to  occur  in  the 
Chalk — a  small  number  compared  with  what  has  since 
been  found.  The  species  had  not  all  been  determined, 
but  some  of  them,  such  as  the  belemnites,  had  been  noted 
as  different  from  those  found  in  the  "  compact  limestone  " 
or  Jurassic  series. 

From  the  platform  of  Chalk,  Cuvier  and  Brongniart 
worked  their  way  upward  through  the  succession  of 
Tertiary  formations.  At  the  base  of  these,  and  resting 
immediately  on  the  Chalk,  came  the  Plastic  Clay — a 
deposit  that  in  many  respects  presented  strong  contrasts 


2 1 6  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

to  the  white  calcareous  formation  underneath  it.  It  showed 
no  passage  into  that  formation,  from  which,  on  the  contrary, 
it  was  always  abruptly  marked  off,  and  it  yielded  no 
organic  remains.  The  two  geologists  accordingly  drew  the 
sound  inference  that  the  clay  and  the  chalk  must  have 
been  laid  down  under  very  different  conditions  of  water, 
and  they  believed  that  the  animals  which  lived  in  the 
first  period  did  not  exist  in  the  second.  They  likewise 
concluded  that  the  abrupt  line  of  junction  between  the 
two  formations  might  indicate  a  long  interval  of  time,  and 
they  inferred,  from  the  occurrence  of  an  occasional  breccia 
of  chalk  fragments  at  the  base  of  the  clay,  that  the  chalk 
was  already  solid  when  the  clay  was  deposited. 

The  next  formation  in  ascending  order  was  one  of  sand 
and  the  Calcaire  Grossier.  It  was  shown  to  consist  of  a 
number  of  bands  or  alternationsj  of  limestone  and  marl ; 
following  each  other  always  in  the  same  order,  and  trace- 
able as  far  as  the  two  observers  had  followed  them.  Some 
of  them  might  diminish  or  disappear,  but  what  were  below 
in  one  district  were  never  found  above  in  another.  "  This 
constancy  in  the  order  of  superposition  of  the  thinnest 
strata,"  the  writers  remark,  "  for  a  distance  of  at  least  12 
myriametres  (75  English  miles),  is  in  our  opinion  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  facts  which  we  have  met  with  in  the 
course  of  our  researches.  It  should  lead  to  results  for  the  arts 
and  for  geology  all  the  more  interesting  that  they  are  sure." 

One  of  the  most  significant  parts  of  the  essay  is  the 
account  it  gives  of  the  method  adopted  by  the  explorers  to 
identify  the  various  strata  from  district  to  district.  They 
had  grasped  the  true  principle  of  stratigraphy,  and  applied 
it  with  signal  success.  The  passage  deserves  to  be  quoted 


v         Cuvier  and  Brongniart  on  Paris  Basin    2 1 7 

from  its  historical  importance  in  the  annals  of  science : 
"  The  means  which  we  have  employed  for  the  recognition, 
among  so  many  limestones,  of  a  bed  already  observed  in  a 
distant  quarter,  has  been  taken  from  the  nature  of  the 
fossils  contained  in  each  bed.  These  fossils  are  generally 
the  same  in  corresponding  beds,  and  present  tolerably 
marked  differences  of  species  from  one  group  of  beds  to 
another.  It  is  a  method  of  recognition  which  up  to  the 
present  has  never  deceived  us. 

"  It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  difference 
in  this  respect  between  one  bed  and  another  is  as  sharply 
marked  off  as  that  between  the  chalk  and  the  limestone. 
The  characteristic  fossils  of  one  bed  become  less  abundant 
in  the  bed  above  and  disappear  altogether  in  the  others,  or 
are  gradually  replaced  by  new  fossils,  which  had  not 
previously  appeared." l 

The  authors  then  proceed  to  enumerate  the  chief  groups 
of  strata  composing  the  Calcaire  Grossier,  beginning  at 
the  bottom  and  tracing  the  succession  upward.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  follow  them  into  these  details.  We  may  note 
that,  even  at  that  time,  the  prodigious  richness  of  the  lower 
parts  of  this  formation  in  fossil  shells  had  been  shown  by 
the  labours  of  Defrance,  who  had  gathered  from  them  no 
fewer  than  600  species,  which  had  been  described  by 
Lamarck.  It  was  noted  by  Cuvier  and  Brongniart  that 
most  of  these  shells  are  much  more  unlike  living  forms 
than  those  found  in  the  higher  strata.  These  observers 
also  drew,  frorr^  the  unfossiliferous  nature  of  the  highest 
parts  of  the  formation,  the  inference  that  while  the  Calcaire 
Grossier  was  deposited  slowly,  layer  after  layer,  the  number 

1  Journal  des  Mines,  xxiii.  p.  436. 


2 1 8  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

of  shells  gradually  diminished  until  they  disappeared,  the 
waters  either  no  longer  containing  them  or  being  unable 
to  preserve  them. 

The  gypseous  series  which  succeeds  offered  to  Cuvier 
and  Brongniart  an  excellent  example  of  what  Werner 
termed  a  "  geological  formation/'  inasmuch  as  it  presents  a 
succession  of  strata  very  different  from  each  other,  yet 
evidently  deposited  in  one  continuous  sequence.  Cuvier 
had  already  startled  the  world  by  his  descriptions  of  some 
of  the  extinct  quadrupeds  entombed  in  these  deposits.  In 
calling  attention  to  the  occurrence  of  these  animals,  the 
authors  refer  to  the  occasional  discovery  of  fresh-water 
shells  in  the  same  strata,  and  to  the  confirmation  thereby 
afforded  to  the  opinion  of  Lamanon  and  others,  that  the 
gypsum  of  Montmartre  and  otAer  places  around  Paris  had 
been  deposited  in  fresh- water  lakes. 

They  saw  the  importance  of  a  thin  band  of  marl  at  the 
top  of  the  gypseous  series  which,  in  spite  of  its  apparent 
insignificance,  they  had  found  to  be  traceable  for  a  great 
distance.  Its  value  arose  from  its  marking  what  would 
now  be  called  a  lithological  horizon,  but  even  more  from  its 
stratigraphical  interest,  inasmuch  as  it  served  to  separate 
a  lacustrine  from  a  marine  series.  All  the  shells  below 
this  seam  were  found  to  be  fresh- water  forms.  Those  in 
the  seam  itself  were  species  of  Tellina,  and  all  those  in  the 
strata  above  were,  like  that  shell,  marine.  The  two 
geologists,  struck  by  the  marked  difference  of  physical 
conditions  represented  by  the  two  sections  of  the  gypseous 
series,  had  tried  to  separate  it  into  two  formations,  but  had 
not  carried  out  the  design. 

Higher  up  in  the  series,  above  a  group  of  sands  and 


v         Cuvier  and  Brongniart  on  Paris  Basin    219 

marine  sandstones,  an  unfossiliferous  siliceous  limestone, 
and  a  sandstone  formation  without  shells,  Cuvier  and 
Brongniart  found  a  widespread  fresh-water  siliceous  lime- 
stone or  millstone,  specially  characterised  by  containing 
liimnea,  Planorbis,  and  other  lacustrine  shells. 

The  youngest  formation  which  they  described  was  the 
alluvium  of  the  valleys,  with  bones  of  elephant  and  trunks 
of  trees. 

Subsequent  research  has  slightly  altered  and  greatly 
elaborated  the  arrangement  made  by  Cuvier  and  Brong- 
niart of  the  successive  Tertiary  formations  of  the  Paris 
basin.  But  although  the  subdivision  of  the  strata  into 
definite  stratigraphical  and  palaeontological  platforms  has 
been  carried  into  far  greater  detail,  the  broad  outlines 
traced  by  them  remain  as  true  now  as  they  were  when 
first  sketched  early  in  the  century.  These  two  great  men 
not  merely  marked  out  the  grouping  of  the  formations  in 
a  limited  tract  of  country.  They  established  on  a  basis 
of  accurate  observation  the  principles  of  palseontological 
stratigraphy.  They  demonstrated  the  use  of  fossils  for 
the  determination  of  geological  chronology,  and  they  paved 
the  way  for  the  enormous  advances  which  have  since 
been  made  in  that  department  of  our  science.  For  these 
distinguished  labours  they  deserve  an  honoured  place 
among  the  Founders  of  Geology.  Cuvier's  contributions 
to  zoology,  palaeontology,  and  comparative  anatomy  were 
so  vast  and  important  that  his  share  in  the  establishment 
of  correct  stratigraphy  is  apt  to  be  forgotten.  But  his 
name  must  ever  be  bracketed  with  that  of  Brongniart 
for  the  service  rendered  to  geology  by  their  conjoint  work 
among  the  Tertiary  deposits  of  the  Paris  basin. 


220  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Although  Cuvier's  researches  among  fossil  animals,  and 
the  principles  of  comparative  anatomy  which  he  established, 
contributed  powerfully  to  the  foundation  and  develop- 
ment of  palaeontology  as  a  distinct  department  of  biology, 
his  services  to  geology  proper  may  be  looked  upon  as 
almost  wholly  comprised  in  the  joint  essay  with  Brong- 
niart.  Geology  indeed  had  much  fascination  for  him,  and 
he  wrote  a  special  treatise  on  it  entitled  A  Discourse  on 
the  Revolutions  of  the  Surface  of  the  Gf-lobe.1  But  though 
it  contained  some  interesting  reflections  on  his  own 
palseontological  discoveries,  and  displayed  the  eloquence 
and  grace  of  his  style,  it  really  indicated  no  advance  in 
geological  theory.  On  the  contrary,  in  many  respects  it 
fell  behind  the  knowledge  of  his  time.  In  spite  of  the 
popularity  it  attained,  on  account  of  the  great  celebrity 
of  its  author,  it  cannot  be  cited  as  one  of  the  landmarks 
of  geological  progress. 

Cuvier's  brilliant  career  is  well  known,  but  I  am  only 
concerned  at  present  with  those  parts  of  it  which  touch  on 
geological  progress.  In  1802  he  became  perpetual  Secre- 
tary of  the  Institute,  and  it  was  in  this  capacity  that  he 

1  In  its  first  form  it  was  prefixed  to  the  Recherches  sur  les  Ossemens 
Fossiles  as  a  preliminary  discourse  on  the  Theory  of  the  Earth.  It  was 
afterwards  published  separately  as  the  Discours  sur  les  Revolutions  de  la 
surface  du  Globe  (1826).  The  work  went  through  six  editions  in  the 
author's  lifetime,  the  latest  (6th)  corrected  and  augmented  by  him  appear- 
ing in  1830.  It  was  translated  into  English  and  German.  The  versions 
published  in  England  were  edited  and  copiously  annotated  by  Prof. 
Jameson  of  Edinburgh,  whose  notes  to  the  early  editions  supply  some 
curious  samples  of  his  adherence  to  Wernerianism.  Cuvier  was  also  the 
author  of  a  Report  on  the  Progress  of  the  Natural  Sciences,  presented  to 
the  Emperor  Napoleon  in  1808,  in  which  he  expressed  various  vague  and 
indefinite  opinions  on  geological  questions.  In  his  earlier  years  his  geo- 
logical bias  was  decidedly  towards  Wernerianism  (see  the  references  in  his 
£logc  on  De  Saussure  already  cited). 


v  J.  J.  D'  Omalius  cf  H alloy  221 

composed  that  remarkable  series  of  eloges  in  which  so 
much  of  the  personal  history  of  the  more  distinguished 
men  of  science  of  his  time  is  enshrined.  Eloquent  and 
picturesque,  full  of  knowledge  and  sympathy,  these  bio- 
graphical notices  form  a  series  of  the  most  instructive 
and  delightful  essays  in  the  whole  range  of  scientific 
literature.  They  include  sketches  of  the  life  and  work  of 
De  Saussure,  Pallas,  Werner,  Desmarest,  Sir  Joseph  Banks, 
Haiiy,  and  Lamarck. 

Five  years  after  the  appearance  of  the  earliest  conjoint 
memoir  by  Cuvier  and  Brongniart,  the  structure  of  the 
country  which  they  described  was  still  further  explored 
and  elucidated  by  a  man  who  afterwards  rose  to  fill  a 
leading  place  among  the  geologists  of  Europe  —  J.  J. 
D'Omalius  d'Halloy.  In  1813  this  able  observer  read  to 
the  Institute  a  memoir  on  the  geology  of  the  Paris  basin 
and  the  surrounding  regions.1  It  corrected  and  extended 
the  work  of  his  predecessors  among  the  Tertiary  forma- 
tions, but  its  interest  for  our  present  purpose  centres 
mainly  in  its  important  contribution  to  the  stratigraphy 
of  the  Secondary  rocks.  He  recognized  the  leading  sub- 
divisions of  the  Cretaceous  series,  and  actually  showed 
the  extent  of  the  system  upon  a  map.  He  likewise 
ascertained  the  stratigraphical  relations  and  range  of  the 
Jurassic  system,  which  he  called  the  "  old  horizontal  lime- 
stone," and  which  he  correctly  depicted  in  its  course 
outside  the  Chalk.  His  little  map,  with  its  clear  outlines 
and  colours,  is  of  historical  importance  as  being  the  first 
attempt  to  construct  a  true  geological  map  of  a  large  tract 
of  France.  It  was  not  a  mere  chart  of  the  surface  rocks, 

1  Ann.  des  Mines,  i.  (1817),  p.  251. 


222  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

like  Guettard's,  but  had  a  horizontal  section,  which  showed 
the  Jurassic  series  lying  unconformably  upon  the  edges 
of  the  Palaeozoic  slates,  and  covered  in  turn  by  the  Gault 
and  the  Chalk. 

While  in  France  it  was  the  prominence  and  richly 
fossiliferous  character  of  the  Tertiary  strata  which  led  to 
the  recognition  of  the  value  of  fossils  in  stratigraphy,  and 
to  the  definite  establishment  of  the  principles  of  strati- 
graphical  geology,  in  England  the  same  result  was  reached 
by  a  study  of  the  Secondary  formations,  which  are  not 
only  more  extensively  developed  there  than  the  younger 
series,  but  display  more  clearly  their  succession  and  per- 
sistence. But  in  both  rpuntries  the  lithological  sequence, 
being  the  more  obvious,  was  first  established  before  it  was 
confirmed  and  extended  by  a  recognition  of  the  value  of 
the  evidence  of  organic  remains. 

As  far  back  as  the  year  1760,  in  a  remarkable  and 
well-known  paper  on  Earthquakes,  the  Eev.  John  Michell 
gave  a  clear  account  of  the  stratified  arrangement  of  the 
rocks  of  England,  describing  their  general  characters  and 
the  persistence  of  these  characters  for  great  distances,  and 
showing  that  while  on  the  flat  ground  the  strata  remain 
nearly  level,  they  gradually  become  inclined  as  they  ap- 
proach the  mountains.1  He  pointed  out  that  the  same  sets 
of  strata,  in  the  same  order,  are  generally  met  with  in  cross- 
ing the  country  towards  the  sea,  the  direction  of  the  ridge 
being  towards  the  north-north-east  and  south-south-west. 
That  he  was  familiar  with  the  broad  features  of  the  suc- 
cession of  strata  in  England  from  the  Coal-measures  of 
Yorkshire  up  to  the  Chalk  is  shown  by  an  interesting 
1  Phil.  Trans,  vol.  li.  (1760),  part  ii.  p.  566. 


John  Michell  22, 


table  which  seems  to  have  been  drawn  up  by  him  about 
1788  or  1789,  and  which  was  published  after  his  death.1 

Michell  enables  us  to  form  a  clear  conception  of  his 
views  by  the  following  illustration.  "Let  a  number  of 
leaves  of  paper,"  he  remarks,  "  of  several  different  sorts  or 
colours,  be  pasted  upon  one  another ;  then  bending  them 
up  into  a  ridge  in  the  middle,  conceive  them  to  be  reduced 
again  to  a  level  surface,  by  a  plane  so  passing  through 
them  as  to  cut  off  all  the  part  that  has  been  raised.  Let 
the  middle  now  be  again  raised  a  little,  and  this  will  be  a 
good  general  representation  of  most,  if  not  all,  large  tracts 
of  mountainous  countries,  together  with  the  parts  adjacent, 
throughout  the  whole  world.  From  this  formation  of  the 
earth  it  will  follow  that  we  ought  to  meet  with  the  same 
kinds  of  earths,  stones,  and  minerals,  appearing  at  the 
surface  in  long  narrow  slips,  and  lying  parallel  to  the 
greatest  rise  of  any  long  ridge  of  mountains ;  and  so,  in 
fact,  we  find  them." 

Contrast  this  clear  presentation  of  the  tectonic  struc- 
ture of  our  mountains  and  continents  with  the  confused 
and  contradictory  explanation  of  the  same  structure  sub- 
sequently promulgated  from  Freiberg.  Michell  clearly 
realized  that  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  crust  had  been  laid 
down  in  a  definite  order,  that  they  had  been  uplifted 
along  the  mountain  axes,  that  they  had  been  subsequently 
planed  down,  and  that  their  present  disposition  in  parallel 
bands  was  the  result  partly  of  the  upheaval  and  partly  of 
the  denudation. 

The  establishment  of  stratigraphy  in  England,  and  of 
the  stratigraphical  sequence  of  the  Secondary,  or  at  least 
1  See  Phil.  Mag.  vol.  xxxvi.  p.  102. 


224  The  Foimders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  Jurassic,  rocks  for  all  the  rest  of  Europe  was  the  work 
of  William  Smith — usually  known  as  the  "  Father  of  Eng- 
lish geology."  No  more  interesting  chapter  in  scientific 
annals  can  be  found  than  that  which  traces  the  progress 
of  this  remarkable  man,  who,  amidst  endless  obstacles  and 
hindrances,  clung  to  the  idea  which  had  early  taken  shape 
in  his  mind,  and  who  lived  to  see  that  idea  universally 
accepted  as  the  guiding  principle  in  the  investigation  of 
the  geological  structure,  not  of  England  only,  but  of  Europe 
and  of  the  globe. 

William  Smith  (1769-1839)  came  of  a  race  of  yeomen 
farmers  who  for  many  generations  had  owned  small  tracts  of 

land  in  Oxfordshire  and  Gloucestershire.1    He  was  born  at 

^ 

Churchill,  in  the  former  county,  on  23rd  March  1769,  the 
same  year  that  gave  birth  to  Cuvier.  Before  he  was  eight 
years  old  he  lost  his  father.  After  his  mother  married  for 
the  second  time,  he  seems  to  have  been  largely  dependent 
upon  an  uncle  for  education  and  assistance.  The  instruc- 
tion obtainable  at  the  village  school  was  of  the  most 
limited  kind.  With  difficulty  the  lad  procured  means  to 
purchase  a  few  books  from  which  he  might  learn  the 
rudiments  of  geometry  and  surveying.  Already  he  had 
taken  to  the  observing  and  collecting  of  stones,  particu- 
larly of  the  well-preserved  fossils  whereof  the  Jurassic 
rocks  of  his  neighbourhood  were  full.  He  came  to  be 
interested  in  questions  of  drainage  and  other  pursuits  con- 
nected with  the  surface  of  the  land,  and  in  spite  of  want 
of  encouragement,  made  such  progress  with  his  studies 
that  at  the  age  of  eighteen  he  was  taken  as  assistant  to  a 

1  The  biographical  details  are  derived  from  the  Memoirs  of  William 
Smith,  LL.D.,  by  his  nephew  and  pupil,  John  Phillips,  1844. 


v  William  Smitli  s  Early  Life  225 

surveyor.  But  he  had  no  education  beyond  that  of  the 
village  school  and  what  he  had  been  able  to  acquire 
through  his  own  reading.  This  early  defect  crippled  to  the 
end  of  his  life  his  efforts  to  make  known  to  the  world 
the  scientific  results  he  had  obtained. 

Smith's  capacity  and  steady  powers  of  application  were 
soon  appreciated  in  the  vocation  upon  which  he  had 
entered.  Before  long  he  was  entrusted  with  all  the 
ordinary  work  of  a  land  surveyor,  to  which  were  added 
many  duties  that  would  now  devolve  upon  a  civil  engineer. 
From  an  early  part  of  his  professional  career,  his  attention 
was  arrested  by  the  great  varieties  among  the  soils  with 
which  he  had  to  deal,  and  the  connection  between  these 
soils  and  the  strata  underlying  them.  He  had  continually 
to  traverse  the  red  ground  that  marks  the  position  of  the 
Triassic  marls  and  sandstones  in  the  south-west  and  centre 
of  England,  and  to  pass  thence  across  the  clays  and  lime- 
stones of  the  Lias,  or  to  and  fro  among  the  freestones  and 
shales  of  the  Oolites.  The  contrasts  of  these  different  kinds 
of  rock,  the  variations  in  their  characteristic  scenery,  and  the 
persistence  of  feature  which  marked  each  band  of  strata 
gave  him  constant  subjects  of  observation  and  reflection. 

By  degrees  his  surveying  duties  took  him  farther  afield, 
and  brought  him  in  contact  with  yet  older  formations,  par- 
ticularly with  the  Coal-measures  of  Somerset  and  their 
dislocations.  At  the  age  of  four-and-twenty,  he  was  en- 
gaged in  carrying  out  a  series  of  levellings  for  a  canal,  and 
had  the  opportunity  of  confirming  a  suspicion,  which  had 
been  gradually  taking  shape  in  his  mind,  that  the  various 
strata  with  which  he  was  familiar,  though  they  seemed 
quite  flat,  were  really  inclined  at  a  gentle  angle  towards 

Q 


226  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  east,  and  terminated  sharply  towards  the  west,  like  so 
many  "  slices  of  bread  and  butter."  He  took  the  liveliest 
interest  in  this  matter,  and  felt  convinced  that  it  must 
have  a  far  deeper  meaning  and  wider  application  than  he 
had  yet  surmised. 

His  first  start  on  geological  exploration  took  place  the 
following  year  (1794)  when,  as  engineer  to  a  canal  that 
was  to  be  constructed,  he  was  deputed  to  accompany  two 
of  the  Committee  of  the  Company  in  a  tour  of  some  weeks' 
duration,  for  the  purpose  of  gaining  information  respecting 
the  construction,  management,  and  trade  of  other  lines  of 
inland  navigation.  The  party  went  as  far  north  as  New- 
castle, and  came  back^through  Shropshire  and  Wales  to 
Bath,  having  travelled  900  miles  on  their  mission.  The 
young  surveyor  made  full  use  of  the  opportunities  which 
this  journey  afforded  him.  He  had  by  this  time  satisfied 
himself  that  the  stratigraphical  succession,  which  he  had 
worked  out  for  a  small  part  of  the  south-west  of  England, 
had  an  important  bearing  on  scientific  questions,  besides 
many  practical  applications  of  importance.  But  it  needed 
to  be  extended  and  checked  by  a  wider  experience.  "  No 
journey,  purposely  contrived,"  so  he  wrote,  "could  have 
better  answered  my  purpose.  To  sit  forward  on  the  chaise 
was  a  favour  readily  granted ;  my  eager  eyes  were  never 
idle  a  moment ;  and  post-haste  travelling  only  put  me  upon 
new  resources.  General  views,  under  existing  circum- 
stances, were  the  best  that  could  have  been  taken,  and  the 
facility  of  knowing,  by  contours  and  other  features,  what 
might  be  the  kind  of  stratification  in  the  hills  is  a  proof 
of  early  advancement  in  the  generalization  of  phenomena. 

"  In  the  more  confined  views,  where  the  roads  commonly 


v  William  Smitlis  Early  Career  227 

climb  to  the  summits,  as  in  our  start  from  Bath  to  Tetbury, 
by  Swanswick,  the  slow  driving  up  the  steep  hills  afforded 
me  distinct  views  of  the  nature  of  the  rocks ;  rushy 
pastures  on  the  slopes  of  the  hills,  the  rivulets  and  kind  of 
trees,  all  aided  in  defining  the  intermediate  clays;  and 
while  occasionally  walking  to  see  bridges,  locks,  and  other 
works,  on  the  lines  of  canal,  more  particular  observations 
could  be  made. 

"My  friends  being  both  concerned  in  working  coal, 
were  interested  in  two  objects  ;  but  I  had  three,  and  the 
most  important  one  to  me  I  pursued  unknown  to  them ; 
though  I  was  continually  talking  about  the  rocks  and 
other  strata,  they  seemed  not  desirous  of  knowing  the 
guiding  principles  or  objects  of  these  remarks ;  and  it 
might  have  been  from  the  many  hints,  perhaps  mainly  on 
this  subject,  which  I  made  in  the  course  of  the  journey, 
that  Mr.  Palmer  jocosely  recommended  me  to  write  a  book 
of  hints." 1 

We  can  picture  the  trio  on  this  memorable  journey — 
the  young  man  in  front  eagerly  scrutinizing  every  field, 
ridge,  and  hill  along  each  side  of  the  way,  noting  every 
change  of  soil  and  topography,  and  turning  round  every 
little  while,  unable  to  restrain  his  exuberant  pleasure  as  his 
eye  detected  one  indication  after  another  of  the  application 
of  the  principles  he  had  found  to  hold  good  at  home,  and 
pointing  them  out  with  delight  to  his  two  sedate  companions, 
who  looked  at  him  with  amusement,  but  with  neither 
knowledge  of  his  aims  nor  sympathy  with  his  enthusiasm. 

For  six  years  William  Smith  was  engaged  in  setting  out 
and  superintending  the  construction  of  the  Somersetshire 

1  Memoirs,  p.  10. 


228  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Coal  Canal.  In  the  daily  engrossing  cares  of  these  duties 
it  might  seem  that  there  could  be  little  opportunity  for 
adding  to  his  stores  of  geological  knowledge,  or  working 
out  in  more  detail  the  principles  of  stratigraphy  that  he 
had  already  reached.  But  in  truth  these  six  years  were 
among  the  most  important  in  his  whole  career.  The  con- 
stant and  close  observation  which  he  was  compelled  to 
give  to  the  strata  that  had  to  be  cut  through  in  making 
the  canal,  led  him  to  give  more  special  attention  to  the 
organic  remains  in  them.  From  boyhood  he  had  gathered 
fossils,  but  without  connecting  them  definitely  with  the 
succession  of  the  rocks  that  contained  them.  He  now 
began  to  observe  more  ^carefully  their  distribution,  and 
came  at  last  to  perceive  that,  certainly  among  the 
formations  with  which  he  had  to  deal,  "  each  stratum 
contained  organized  fossils  peculiar  to  itself,  and  might,  in 
cases  otherwise  doubtful,  be  recognized  and  discriminated 
from  others  like  it,  but  in  a  different  part  of  the  series,  by 
examination  of  them." 1 

It  was  while  engaged  in  the  construction  of  this  canal 
that  Smith  began  to  arrange  his  observations  for  publica- 
tion. He  had  a  methodical  habit  of  writing  out  his  notes 
and  reflections,  and  dating  them.  But  he  had  not  the  art 
of  condensing  his  material,  and  arranging  it  in  literary 
form.  Nevertheless,  he  could  not  for  a  moment  doubt  that 
the  results  which  he  had  arrived  at  would  be  acknowledged 
by  the  public  to  possess  both  scientific  importance  and 
practical  value.  Much  of  his  work  was  inserted  upon 
maps,  wherein  he  traced  the  position  and  range  of  each 
of  the  several  groups  of  rock  with  which  he  had  become 

1  Memoirs,  p.  15. 


v  William  SmitJis  Observations  229 

familiar.  He  had  likewise  ample  notes  of  local  sections, 
and  complete  evidence  of  a  recognizable  succession  among 
the  rocks.  Not  only  could  he  identify  the  strata  by  their 
fossils,  but  he  could  point  out  to  the  surveyors,  contractors, 
and  other  practical  men  with  whom  he  came  in  contact 
how  useful  in  many  kinds  of  undertakings  was  the  detailed 
knowledge  which  he  had  now  acquired.  In  agriculture, 
in  mining,  in  road-making,  in  draining,  in  the  construction 
of  canals,  in  questions  of  water-supply,  and  in  many  other 
affairs  of  everyday  life,  he  was  able  to  prove  that  his 
system  of  observation  possessed  great  practical  utility. 

In  the  year  1*799,  his  connection  with  the  Canal  Com- 
pany came  to  an  end.  He  was  thereafter  compelled  to 
put  his  geological  knowledge  to  commercial  use,  and  to 
undertake  the  laborious  duties  of  an  engineer  and  surveyor 
on  his  own  account.  Eventually  he  found  considerable 
employment  over  the  whole  length  and  breadth  of  Eng- 
land, and  showed  singular  shrewdness  and  originality  in 
dealing  with  the  engineering  questions  which  came  before 
him.  He  was  a  close  observer  of  nature,  and  his  know- 
ledge of  natural  processes  stood  him  in  good  stead  in  his 
professional  calling.  If  he  had  to  keep  out  the  sea  from 
low  ground,  he  constructed  his  barrier  as  nearly  as  possible 
like  those  which  the  waves  themselves  had  thrown  up. 
If  he  was  asked  to  prevent  a  succession  of  landslips,  he 
studied  the  geological  structure  of  the  district  and  the 
underground  drainage,  and  drove  his  tunnels  so  as  to  inter- 
cept the  springs  underneath.  His  nephew  and  biographer 
tells  us  that  his  engagements  in  connection  with  drainage 
and  irrigation  involved  journeys  of  sometimes  10,000  miles 
in  a  year. 


230  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

Such  continuous  travelling  to  and  fro  across  the  country 
served  to  augment  enormously  his  minute  personal  acquaint- 
ance with  the  geological  structure  of  England.  He  made 
copious  notes,  and  his  retentive  memory  enabled  him  to 
retain  a  vivid  recollection  even  of  the  details  of  what  he 
had  once  seen.  But  the  leisure  which  he  needed  in  order 
to  put  his  materials  together  seemed  to  flee  from  him. 
Year  after  year  passed  away  ;  the  pile  of  manuscript  rose 
higher,  but  no  progress  was  made  in  the  preparation  of 
the  growing  mass  of  material  for  publication. 

In  the  year  1799,  William  Smith  made  the  acquaint- 
ance of  the  Kev.  Benjamin  Eichardson,  who,  living  in 
Bath,  had  interested  Lamself  in  collecting  fossils  from 
the  rocks  in  the  neighbourhood.  Looking  over  this  collec- 
tion, the  experienced  surveyor  was  able  to  tell  far  more 
about  its  contents  than  the  owner  of  it  knew  himself. 
Writing  long  afterwards  to  Sedgwick,  Mr.  Eichardson 
narrated  how  Smith  could  decide  at  once  from  what  strata 
they  had  respectively  come,  and  how  well  he  knew  the  lie 
of  the  rocks  on  the  ground.  "With  the  open  liberality 
peculiar  to  Mr.  Smith/'  he  adds,  "  he  wished  me  to  com- 
municate this  to  the  Eev.  J.  Townsend  of  Pewsey  (then 
in  Bath),  who  was  not  less  surprised  at  the  discovery. 
But  we  were  soon  much  more  astonished  by  proofs  of  his 
own  collecting,  that  whatever  stratum  was  found  in  any 
part  of  England,  the  same  remains  would  be  found  in  it 
and  no  other.  Mr.  Townsend,  who  had  pursued  the  subject 
forty  or  fifty  years,  and  had  travelled  over  the  greater  part 
of  civilized  Europe,  declared  it  perfectly  unknown  to  all 
his  acquaintance,  and,  he  believed,  to  all  the  rest  of  the 
world.  In  consequence  of  Mr.  Smith's  desire  to  make 


v  William  Smitti s  Table  of  Strata         231 

so  valuable  a  discovery  universally  known,  I  without 
reserve  gave  a  card  of  the  English  strata  to  Baron  Kosen- 
crantz,  Dr.  Miiller  of  Christiania,  and  many  others,  in  the 
year  1801." x 

The  card  of  the  English  strata  referred  to  in  this  letter 
was  a  tabular  list  of  the  formations  from  the  Coal  up  to 
the  Chalk,  with  the  thicknesses  of  the  several  members, 
an  enumeration  of  some  of  their  characteristic  fossils,  and 
a  synopsis  of  their  special  lithological  peculiarities  and 
scenery.  This  table  was  drawn  up  in  triplicate  by  Mr. 
Eichardson,  at  Smith's  dictation,  in  the  year  1799,  each  of 
the  friends  and  Mr.  Townsend  taking  a  copy.  Smith's 
copy  was  presented  by  him  to  the  Geological  Society  of 
London  in  1831. 

Though  not  actually  published,  this  table  obtained 
wide  publicity.  It  showed  that  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  stratigraphy  had  been  worked  out  by  William 
Smith  alone,  and  independently,  before  the  end  of  last 
century.  Had  it  been  printed  and  sold  it  would  have 
established  his  claim  to  priority  beyond  all  possibility  of 
cavil.  But  even  without  this  technical  support,  his  place 
among  the  pioneers  of  stratigraphy  cannot  be  gainsaid. 

Notwithstanding  the  abundant  professional  employ- 
ment which  he  obtained,  Smith  never  abounded  in  money. 
So  keenly  desirous  was  he  to  complete  his  investigation 
of  the  distribution  of  the  strata  of  England,  for  the  purpose 
of  constructing  a  map  of  the  country,  that  he  spent  as 
freely  as  he  gained,  walking,  riding,  or  posting  in  direc- 
tions quite  out  of  the  way  of  his  business.  "  Having  thus 
emptied  his  pockets  for  what  he  deemed  a  public  object,  he 

1  Memoirs,  p.  31. 


232  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

was  forced  to  make  up,  by  night-travelling,  the  time  he  had 
lost,  so  as  not  to  fail  in  his  professional  engagements." 

Stimulated  by  the  kindly  urgency  of  his  friend  Bichard- 
son,  who  alarmed  him  by  pointing  out  that  if  he  did  not 
publish  his  observations,  some  one  else  might  anticipate 
him,  Smith  was  prevailed  upon  to  draw  up  a  prospectus  of 
a  work  in  which  he  proposed  to  give  a  detailed  account  of 
the  various  strata  of  England  and  Wales,  with  an  accom- 
panying map  and  sections.  A  publisher  in  London  was 
named,  and  the  prospectus  was  extensively  circulated  ;  but 
it  led  to  nothing. 

Eventually  Smith  established  himself  in  London  as  the 
best  centre  for  his  professional  work,  and  in  1805  he  took 
a  large  house  there,  with  room  for  the  display  of  his 
collections  and  maps,  which  were  open  to  the  inspection  of 
any  one  interested  in  such  matters.  Among  his  materials 
he  had  completed  a  large  county  map  of  Somersetshire,  as 
a  specimen  of  what  might  be  done  for  the  different  counties 
of  England.  This  document  seems  to  have  been  exhibited 
at  the  Board  of  Agriculture,  and  a  proposal  was  made 
that  he  should  be  permanently  attached  to  the  corps  of 
engineers  then  engaged  in  surveying  the  island.  But  the 
idea  never  went  farther.  Not  until  thirty  years  later  was 
it  revived  by  De  la  Beche,  and  pressed  with  such  per- 
severance as  to  lead  in  the  end  to  the  establishment  of  the 
present  Geological  Survey  of  Great  Britain. 

From  1799,  when  Smith  first  contemplated  the  publica- 
tion of  his  observations,  every  journey  that  he  took  was 
as  far  as  possible  made  subservient  to  the  completion  of  his 
map  of  England.  At  last,  but  not  until  the  end  of  the 
year  1812,  he  found  a  publisher  enterprising  enough  to 


v  William  Smittis  Map  of  England       233 

undertake  the  risk  of  engraving  and  publishing  this  map. 
The  work  was  begun  in  January  1813,  and  was  published 
in  August  1815.1  It  was  appropriately  dedicated  to  Sir 
Joseph  Banks,  President  of  the  Eoyal  Society,  who  had 
encouraged  and  helped  the  author. 

William  Smith's  map  has  long  since  taken  its  place  among 
the  great  classics  of  geological  cartography.  It  was  the  first 
attempt  to  portray  on  such  a  scale  not  merely  the  distribu- 
tion, but  the  stratigraphy  of  the  formations  of  a  whole 
country.  Well  might  D'Aubuisson  say  of  it  that  "  what 
the  most  distinguished  mineralogists  during  a  period  of  half 
a  century  had  done  for  a  little  part  of  Germany,  had  been 
undertaken  and  accomplished  for  the  whole  of  England  by 
one  man ;  and  his  work,  as  fine  in  its  results  as  it  is 
astonishing  in  its  extent,  demonstrates  that  England  is 
regularly  divided  into  strata,  the  order  of  which  is  never 
inverted,  and  that  the  same  species  of  fossils  are  found  in 
the  same  stratum  even  at  wide  distances." 2 

But  it  is  not  so  much  as  a  cartographical  achievement 
that  Smith's  great  map  deserves  our  attention  at  present. 
Its  appearance  marked  a  distinct  epoch  in  stratigraphical 
geology,  for  from  that  time  some  of  what  are  now  the 
most  familiar  terms  in  geological  nomenclature  passed  into 

1  "  A  Geological  Map  of  England  and  Wales,  with  Part  of  Scotland  ;  ex- 
hibiting the  Collieries,  Mines,  and  Canals,  the  Marshes  and  Fen  Lands  origin- 
ally overflowed  by  the  Sea  ;  and  the  Varieties  of  Soil,  according  to  the  Varia- 
tions of  the  Substrata ;  illustrated  by  the  most  descriptive  Names  of  Places, 
and  of  Local  Districts;  showing  also  the  Rivers,  Sites  of  Parks,  and  Principal 
Seats  of  the  Nobility  and  Gentry  ;  and  the  opposite  Coast  of  France.     By 
William  Smith,  Mineral  Surveyor."     The  map  consists  of  fifteen  sheets  on 
the  scale  of  five  miles  to  an  inch,  and  measures  8  feet  9  inches  in  height 
by  6  feet  2  inches  in  width.     It  was  accompanied  with  a  quarto  memoir 
or  explanation  of  50  pages. 

2  TraiUde  Geognosie  (1819),  tome  ii.  p.  253. 


234  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

common  use.  Smith  had  no  scholarship ;  he  did  not 
invent  euphonious  terms  from  Greek  or  Latin  roots ;  he 
was  content  to  take  the  rustic  or  provincial  names  he 
found  in  common  use  over  the  districts  which  he  traversed. 
Hence  were  now  introduced  into  geological  literature  such 
words  as  London  Clay,  Kentish  Eag,  Purbeck  Stone, 
Carstone,  Cornbrash,  Clunch  Clay,  Lias,  Forest  Marble. 

By  ingeniously  colouring  the  bottom  of  each  formation 
a  fuller  tint  than  the  rest,  Smith  brought  the  general 
succession  of  strata  conspicuously  before  the  eye.  Further, 
by  the  aid  of  vertical  tables  of  the  formations  and  a  hori- 
zontal section  from  Wales  to  the  vale  of  the  Thames,  he 
was  able  to  give  the  retails  of  the  succession  which,  for 
some  twenty-four  years,  he  had  been  engaged  in  unravel- 
ling in  every  part  of  the  kingdom. 

Of  especial  value  and  originality  was  his  clear  sub- 
division of  what  is  now  known  as  the  Jurassic  system. 
He  did  for  that  section  of  the  geological  record  what 
Cuvier  and  Brongniart  had  done  for  the  Tertiary  series  of 
Paris.  After  the  first  copies  of  the  map  had  been  issued, 
he  was  able  still  further  to  subdivide  and  improve  his 
classification  of  these  strata,  introducing  among  the  new 
bands,  Crag,  Portland  Eock,  Coral  Eag,  and  Kellaways 
Stone.1 

In  the  memoir  accompanying  the  map,  the  tabular 
arrangement  of  the  strata  drawn  up  in  1799  was  inserted, 
with  its  column  giving  the  names,  so  far  as  he  knew  them, 
of  the  more  characteristic  fossils  of  each  formation. 

To  the  laborious  researches  of  William  Smith  we  are 
thus  indebted  for  the  first  attempt  to  distinguish  the 

1  Phillips,  Memoirs,  p.  146. 


v  Smith's  Provincial  Terminology          235 

various  subdivisions  of  the  Secondary  rocks,  from  the  base 
of  the  New  Ked  Sandstone  up  to  the  Chalk,  and  for  the 
demonstration  that  these  successive  platforms  are  marked 
off  from  each  other,  not  merely  by  mineral  characters,  but 
by  their  peculiar  assemblages  of  organic  remains.  From 
his  provincial  terminology  come  the  more  sonorous  names 
of  Purbeckian,  Portlandian,  Callovian,  Corallian,  Bath- 
onian,  Liassic,  which  are  now  familiar  words  in  every 
geological  text-book.1 

In  his  eagerness  to  make  his  map  as  complete  and 
accurate  as  was  possible  to  him,  Smith  spent  so  freely  of 
his  hardly-earned  income  that  he  accumulated  no  savings 
against  the  day  of  trial,  which  came  only  too  soon.  He 
had  been  induced  to  lay  down  a  railway  on  a  little  pro- 
perty which  early  in  life  he  had  purchased  near  Bath, 
with  the  view  of  opening  some  new  quarries  and  bringing 
the  building-stone  to  the  barges  on  the  canal.  Unfortun- 

1  Before  passing  from  the  subject  of  Smith's  map  I  may  refer  to  the 
map  of  England  and  Wales  which  was  prepared  by  G.  B.  Greenough  and 
published  in  1819.  Greenough,  in  the  memoir  accompanying  this  map, 
states  that  though  he  knew  as  early  as  1804  that  Smith  had  begun  a 
similar  work,  he  had  been  led  to  believe  that  the  design  was  abandoned. 
Accordingly  he  undertook  the  task  in  1808,  and  having  been  encouraged  by 
the  Geological  Society,  of  which  he  was  President,  to  complete  it  on  a 
large  scale,  he  proceeded  with  it,  and  the  map  as  prepared  by  him  had 
been  more  than  a  year  in  the  hands  of  the  engraver  when  Smith's  map 
appeared  in  1815.  Greenough's  is  a  better  piece  of  engraving,  and  in 
some  respects  is  more  detailed,  especially  as  regards  the  formations 
older  than  the  Coal.  It  shows  how  much  information  as  to  English 
stratigraphy  had  become  available,  partly  no  doubt  through  Smith's 
labours  before  1815.  Greenough's  map  was  taken  over  by  the  Geo- 
logical Society,  has  been  as  far  as  possible  kept  up  to  date,  and  is  still 
on  sale.  But  the  map  in  its  present  form  differs  much  from  its  author's 
original  version.  The  appearance  of  this  map  under  the  sanction  of  the 
Geological  Society  seems  to  have  affected  the  sale  of  Smith's,  which  does 
not  appear  to  have  reached  a  second  edition.  A  much  reduced  version  of 
it  was  published  in  1820. 


236  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

ately  the  stone,  on  the  continuance  and  quality  of  which 
the  whole  success  of  the  enterprise  rested,  failed.  It 
became  necessary  to  sell  the  property,  and  thereafter 
the  sanguine  engineer  was  left  with  a  load  of  debt  under 
which  most  men  would  have  succumbed.  Struggling 
under  this  blow,  he  was  first  compelled  to  part  with  his 
collections  of  fossils,  which  were  acquired  by  the  Govern- 
ment and  placed  in  the  British  Museum.  Next  he  found 
himself  no  longer  able  to  bear  the  expense  of  the  house  in 
London  which  he  had  occupied  for  fifteen  years.  Not 
only  so,  but  hard  fate  drove  him  to  sell  all  his  furniture, 
books  and  other  property,  keeping  only  the  maps,  sections, 
drawings  and  piles  of  manuscript  which  were  so  precious 
in  his  own  eyes,  but  for  which  nobody  would  have  been 
likely  to  give  him  anything.  For  seven  years  he  had  no 
home,  but  wandered  over  the  north  of  England,  wherever 
professional  engagements  might  carry  him.  His  income 
was  diminished  and  fluctuating,  yet  even  under  this  cloud 
of  trial  he  retained  his  quiet  courage  and  his  enthusiasm 
for  geological  exploration. 

That  a  man  of  Smith's  genius  should  have  been  allowed 
to  remain  in  this  condition  of  toil  and  poverty  has  been 
brought  forward  as  a  reproach  to  his  fellow-countrymen. 
It  may  be  doubted,  however,  whether  a  man  of  his  strong 
independence  of  character  would  have  accepted  any  pecuni- 
ary assistance,  so  long  as  he  could  himself  gain  by  his  own 
exertions  a  modest  though  uncertain  income.  It  is  not 
that  his  merits  were  unrecognized  in  England,  though 
perhaps  the  appreciation  of  them  was  tardier  than  it  might 
have  been.  In  1818  a  full  and  generous  tribute  to  his 
merits  was  written  by  Fitton,  and  appeared  in  the  Edin- 


v  Personal  Traits  of  William  Smith        237 

burgh  Revieiv  for  February  in  that  year.1  But  though  his 
fame  was  thus  well  established,  his  financial  position  re- 
mained precarious.  He  had  gradually  formed  a  consulting 
practice  as  a  mineral  and  geological  surveyor  in  the  north 
of  England,  and  he  eventually  settled  at  Scarborough.  From 
1828  to  1834  he  acted  as  land-steward  on  the  estate  of 
Hackness  in  the  same  district  of  Yorkshire.  In  1831  he 
received  from  the  Geological  Society  the  first  Wollaston 
Medal,  and  the  President  of  the  Society,  Adam  Sedgwick, 
seized  the  occasion  to  proclaim,  in  fervid  and  eloquent 
words,  the  admiration  and  gratitude  of  all  the  geologists  of 
England  towards  the  man  whom  he  named  "  the  father  of 
English  geology."  Next  year  a  pension  of  £100  was  con- 
ferred upon  him.  Honours  now  came  to  him  in  abundance. 
But  his  scientific  race  was  run.  He  continued  to  increase 
his  piles  of  manuscript,  but  without  methodically  digesting 
them  for  publication.  He  died  on  28th  August  1839,  in 
the  seventy-first  year  of  his  age. 

William  Smith  was  tall  and  broadly  built,  like  the 
English  yeomen  from  whom  he  came.  His  face  was  that 
of  an  honest,  sagacious  farmer,  whose  broad  brow  and  firm 
lips  betokened  great  capacity  and  decision,  but  would 
hardly  have  suggested  the  enthusiastic  student  of  science. 
His  work,  indeed,  bears  out  the  impression  conveyed  by 
his  portrait.  His  plain,  solid,  matter-of-fact  intellect  never 

1  At  the  end  of  1817  there  seems  to  have  been  some  inquiry  as  to 
priority  of  discovery  in  regard  to  Smith's  work.  In  the  following  March 
Mr.  John  Farey  contributed  to  Tilloch's  Philosophical  Magazine  a  definite 
statement  of  Smith's  claims,  showing  that  the  fundamental  facts  and 
principles  he  had  established  had  been  freely  made  known  by  him  to  many 
people  as  far  back  as  1795,  and  that  Farey  himself,  on  5th  August  1807, 
had  published  an  explicit  notification  of  Smith's  discoveries  and  con- 
clusions as  to  fossil  shells  in  the  article  on  Coal  in  Rees'  Cyclopedia. 


238  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

branched  into  theory  or  speculation,  but  occupied  itself 
wholly  in  the  observation  of  facts.  His  range  of  geologi- 
cal vision  was  as  limited  as  his  general  acquirements.  He 
had  reached  early  in  life  the  conclusions  on  which  his 
fame  rests,  and  he  never  advanced  beyond  them.  His 
whole  life  was  dedicated  to  the  task  of  extending  his 
stratigraphical  principles  to  every  part  of  England.  But 
this  extension,  though  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the 
country  in  which  he  laboured,  was  only  of  secondary 
value  in  the  progress  of  science. 

Besides  his  great  map  of  England,  Smith  published  also 
a  series  of  geological  maps,  on  a  larger  scale,  of  the 
English  counties,  comprising  in  some  instances  much 
detailed  local  information.  He  likewise  issued  a  series  of 
striking  horizontal  sections  (1819)  across  different  parts  of 
England,  in  which  the  succession  of  the  formations  was 
clearly  depicted.  These  sections  may  be  regarded  as  the 
complement  of  his  map,  and  as  thus  establishing  for  all  time 
the  essential  features  of  English  stratigraphy,  and  the  main 
outlines  of  the  sequence  of  the  Secondary  formations  for 
the  rest  of  Europe.  In  another  publication,  Strata  Identi- 
fied ly  Organized  Fossils  (1816),  he  gave  a  series  of  plates, 
with  excellent  engraved  figures  of  characteristic  fossils 
from  the  several  formations.  He  adopted  in  this  work  the 
odd  conceit  of  having  the  plates  printed  on  variously 
coloured  paper,  to  correspond  with  the  prevalent  tint  of 
the  strata  from  which  the  fossils  came.  He  had  no  palseon- 
tological  knowledge,  so  that  the  thin  quarto,  never  com- 
pleted, is  chiefly  of  interest  as  a  record  of  the  organisms 
that  he  had  found  most  useful  in  establishing  the  suc- 
cession of  the  formations. 


v  Thomas  Webster  239 

There  is  yet  another  name  that  deserves  to  be  remem- 
bered in  any  review  of  the  early  efforts  to  group  the 
Secondary  formations — that  of  Thomas  Webster.  As  far 
back  as  1811,  this  clever  artist  and  keen-eyed  geologist 
began  a  series  of  investigations  of  the  coast-sections  of  the 
Isle  of  Wight  and  of  Dorset,  and  continued  them  for  three 
years.  They  were  published  in  1815,  the  same  year  that 
saw  Smith's  map  make  its  appearance.1  They  were  thus 
independent  of  that  work.  Webster  had  already  studied 
the  Tertiary  formations  of  the  Isle  of  Wight  and  recog- 
nized their  alternations  of  fresh- water  and  marine  strata,2 
as  had  been  done  in  the  Paris  basin.  He  now  threw  into 
tabular  arrangement  the  whole  succession  of  strata  from 
the  upper  fresh- water  (oligocene)  group  through  the  Lower 
Tertiary  series  to  the  Kimmeridge  shale  in  the  Jurassic 
system.  He  clearly  defined  each  of  the  leading  sub- 
divisions of  the  Cretaceous  series,  and  prepared  the  way 
for  the  admirable  later  and  more  detailed  work  of  Fitton. 

Before  passing  from  the  cartographical  achievements 
of  the  earlier  decades  of  this  century,  I  must  briefly  allude 
to  the  remarkable  maps  and  descriptions  of  Scotland  for 
which  geology  is  indebted  to  the  genius  and  strenuous 
labour  of  John  Macculloch.  His  account  of  the  structure 
of  the  Western  Isles,  and  the  excellent  maps  and  sections 
which  accompanied  it,  had  a  powerful  influence  in  promoting 
the  progress  of  the  study  of  igneous  rocks,  and  have  long 
since  taken  their  place  as  classics  in  geological  literature. 
The  same  indefatigable  observer,  after  years  of  toil,  prepared 
a  geological  map  of  the  whole  of  Scotland — perhaps  the 

1  See  Englefield's  Isle  of  Wight  (1815),  p.  117. 
2  Trans.  Geol.  Soc.  vol.  ii. 


240  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

most  remarkable  achievement  of  the  kind  which  up  to  that 
time  had  been  accomplished  by  a  single  individual.1 

We  have  now  traced  the  slow  and  somewhat  fitful 
progress  of  stratigraphical  geology  during  the  two  last 
decades  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the  first  two 
decades  of  the  present.  From  the  youngest  alluvial 
deposits,  through  the  Tertiary  and  Secondary  formations, 
down  to  the  Carboniferous  system,  the  clue  had  been 
found  by  which  the  strata  could  be  identified  from  one 
district  and  one  country  to  another.  A  prodigious  im- 
petus was  now  given  to  the  study  of  geology.  The 
various  stratified  formations,  arranged  in  their  true 
chronological  order,  we*e  now  seen  to  contain  the  regular 
and  decipherable  records  of  the  history  of  our  globe, 
which  could  be  put  together  with  as  much  certainty  as 
the  faded  manuscripts  of  human  workmanship.  The 
organic  remains  contained  in  them  were  found  to  be  not 
random  accumulations,  heaped  together  by  the  catastrophes 
of  bygone  ages,  but  orderly  chronicles  of  old  sea-floors, 
lake-bottoms,  and  land-surfaces.  The  centre  of  gravity  of 
geology  was  now  rapidly  altered,  especially  in  France  and 
in  Britain.  Minerals  and  rocks  no  longer  monopolized 
the  attention  of  those  who  interested  themselves  in  the 
crust  of  the  earth.  The  petrified  remains  of  former  plants 
and  animals  ceased  to  be  mere  curiosities.  Their  meaning 
as  historical  documents  was  at  last  realized.  They  were 
seen  to  have  a  double  interest,  for  while  they  told  the 
story  of  the  successive  vicissitudes  which  the  surface  of 
the  earth  had  undergone,  from  remote  ages  down  to  the 

1  A  Description  of  the  Western  Isles  of  Scotland,  1819  ;  A  map  of 
Scotland,  1840  ;  and  Memoirs  to  His  Majesty's  Treasury  respecting  the 
Geological  Map  of  Scotland,  by  J.  Macculloch,  1836. 


v  Stratigrapkical  Development  241 

present,  they  likewise  unfolded  an  altogether  new  and 
marvellous  panorama  of  the  progress  of  life  upon  that 
surface.  They  had  hitherto  shared  with  minerals  and 
rocks  the  usage  of  the  term  "  fossil."  As  their  importance 
grew,  they  were  discriminated  as  "  organized  fossils."  But 
the  rising  tide  of  awakened  interest  soon  swept  away 
the  qualifying  participle,  and  the  organic  remains  became 
sole  possessors  of  the  term,  as  if  they  were  the  only  objects 
dug  out  of  the  earth  that  were  any  longer  worthy  to  be 
denominated  fossils. 

While  the  whole  science  of  geology  has  made  gigantic 
advances  during  the  nineteenth  century,  by  far  the  most 
astonishing  progress  has  sprung  from  the  recognition  of 
the  value  of  fossils.  To  that  source  may  be  traced  the 
prodigious  development  of  stratigraphy  over  the  whole 
world,  the  power  of  working  out  the  geological  history 
of  a  country,  and  of  comparing  it  with  the  history  of 
other  countries,  the  possibility  of  tracing  the  synchronism 
and  the  sequence  of  the  geographical  changes  of  the 
earth's  surface  since  life  first  appeared  upon  the  planet. 
To  the  same  source,  also,  we  are  indebted  for  the  rise 
of  the  science  of  palaeontology,  and  the  splendid  con- 
tributions it  has  made  to  biological  investigation.  In 
the  midst  of  the  profusion,  alike  of  blossom  and  of  fruit, 
let  us  not  forget  the  work  of  those  who  sowed  the  seed  of 
the  abundant  harvest  which  we  are  now  reaping.  Let  us 
remember  the  early  suggestive  essays  of  Guettard,  the 
pregnant  ideas  of  Lehmann  and  Fuchsel,  the  prescient 
pages  of  Giraud-Soulavie,  the  brilliant  work  of  Cuvier  and 
Brongniart,  and  the  patient  and  clear-sighted  enthusiasm 
of  William  Smith. 

R 


LECTUEE   VI 

The  Transition  or  Greywacke  formation  resolved  by  Sedgwick  and 
Murchison  into  the  Cambrian,  Silurian  and  Devonian  systems 
— The  pre-Cambrian  rocks  first  begun  to  be  set  in  order  by 
Logan — Foundation  of  Glacial  Geology,  Agassiz — Rise  of 
modern  Petrography ;  William  Nicol,  Henry  Clifton  Sorby 
— The  influence  of  Lyall  and  Darwin — Conclusion. 

THE  determination  of  the  value  of  fossils  as  chronological 
documents  has  done  more  than  any  other  discovery  to  change 
the  character  and  accelerate  the  progress  of  geological  in- 
quiry. No  contrast  can  be  more  striking  than  the  difference 
between  the  condition  of  the  science  before  and  after  that 
discovery  was  made.  Before  that  time,  when  the  Wernerian 
classification  of  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  crust  everywhere 
prevailed,  there  was  really  little  stimulus  to  investigate 
these  rocks  in  their  chronological  relations  to  each  other. 
They  were  grouped,  indeed,  in  a  certain  order,  which  was 
believed  to  express  their  succession  in  time,  but  their 
identification  from  one  country  to  another  proceeded  on 
no  minute  study  of  their  internal  structure,  their  fossil 
contents,  or  their  tectonic  relations.  It  was  thought 
enough  if  they  could  be  placed  in  one  or  other  of  the 
divisions  of  the  Freiberg  system.  When  an  orthodox 
disciple  of  Werner  had  relegated  a  mass  of  deposits  to  the 


LECT.  vi   History  of  Geological  Nomenclat^lre      243 

Transition  series,  or  the  Floetz  or  the  Independent  Coal- 
formation,  as  the  case  might  be,  he  considered  that  all 
that  was  really  essential  had  been  ascertained,  and  his 
interest  in  the  matter  came  practically  to  an  end. 

But  the  extraordinary  awakening  which  resulted  from 
the  labours  of  Cuvier,  Brongniart  and  William  Smith, 
invested  the  strata  with  a  new  meaning.  As  strati- 
graphical  investigations  multiplied,  the  artificiality  and 
inadequacy  of  the  Wernerian  arrangement  became  every 
day  more  apparent.  Even  more  serious  than  the  attacks 
of  the  Vulcanists,  and  the  disclosure  of  eruptive  granites 
and  porphyries  among  the  Transition  rocks,  were  the  dis- 
coveries made  among  the  fossiliferous  stratified  formations. 
It  was  no  longer  possible  to  crowd  and  crush  these  rocks 
within  the  narrow  limits  of  the  Wernerian  system,  even 
in  its  most  modified  and  improved  form.  The  necessity 
for  expansion  and  for  adopting  a  perfectly  natural  nomen- 
clature and  classification,  based  upon  the  actually  observed 
facts,  as  these  were  successively  ascertained,  made  itself 
felt  especially  in  England  and  in  France.  Hence  arose 
the  curiously  mongrel  terminology  which  is  now  in  use. 
Certain  formations  were  named  from  some  prominent 
mineral  in  them,  such  as  Carboniferous.  Others  were 
discriminated  by  some  conspicuous  variety  of  rock,  like 
the  Cretaceous  series.  Some  took  their  names  from  a 
characteristic  structure,  like  Oolitic,  others  from  their 
relative  position  in  the  whole  series,  as  in  the  case  of 
Old  Eed  Sandstone  and  New  Eed  Sandstone.  Certain 
terms  betrayed  the  country  of  their  origin,  as  did  William 
Smith's  English  provincial  names,  like  Gault,  Kellaways 
rock,  and  Lias. 


244  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

The  growth  of  stratigraphical  nomenclature  is  thus 
eminently  characteristic  of  the  early  rise  and  progress  of 
the  study  of  stratigraphy  in  Europe.  Precisians  decry 
this  inartificial  and  haphazard  language,  and  would  like 
to  introduce  a  brand  new  harmonious  and  systematic 
terminology.  But  the  present  arrangement  has  its  his- 
torical interest  and  value,  and  so  long  as  it  is  convenient 
and  intelligible,  I  do  not  see  that  any  advantage  to  science 
would  accrue  from  its  abolition.  The  method  of  naming 
formations  or  groups  of  strata  after  districts  where  they  are 
typically  developed  has  long  been  in  use  and  has  many 
advantages,  but  it  has  not  supplanted  all  the  original 
names,  and  I  for  my  par^hope  that  it  never  will. 

With  regard  to  what  are  now  known  as  the  Tertiary 
and  Secondary  formations,  the  Wernerian  "  Floetz,"  under 
which  they  were  all  comprised,  soon  sank  into  disuse.1 
But  there  was  a  long  pause  before  the  strata  of  older  date 
were  subjected  to  the  same  diligent  study.  For  this  delay 
various  good  reasons  may  be  assigned.  We  have  seen 
that  William  Smith's  researches  went  down  into  the  Coal- 
measures,  but  he  had  only  a  general  and  somewhat  vague 
idea  of  the  sequence  of  the  rocks  beneath  that  formation. 
These  rocks  were  not  wholly  unfossiliferous,  but  in  general, 
throughout  Western  Europe,  they  had  been  so  disturbed 
and  dislocated  that  they  no  longer  presented  the  proofs  of 

1  One  of  the  latest  adaptations  of  the  word  was  that  of  Keferstein  in  his 
Tabellen  uber  die  vergleichende  Geologic  (1825).  He  frankly  threw  over 
Wernerianism,  but  stuck  to  the  pre- Wernerian  Floetz,  which  he  arranged 
in  five  subdivisions.  (1)  Youngest  Floetz,— alluvium,  etc.  ;  (2)  Tertiary 
Floetz, — marls,  gypsum,  etc.,  of  Paris,  Brown  coal ;  (3)  Younger  Floetz, 
or  Chalk  rocks, — Chalk,  Jura  Limestone,  Greensand  ;  (4)  Middle  Floetz,  or. 
Muschelkalk — Lias,  Kenper  marl,  Bunter  sandstone,  Zechstein ;  (5)  Old 
Floetz,  or  Mountain  Limestone— Coal,  Mountain  Limestone. 


vi          The  Transition  Rocks  or  Greywacke      245 

their  sequence  in  the  same  orderly  manner  as  had  led  to 
the  recognition  of  the  succession  of  the  younger  formations. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  in  his  original  scheme  of 
classification  Werner  grouped  some  rocks  as  Primitive 
(uranfangliche),  and  classed  together  as  Floetz  the  whole 
series  of  stratified  formations  between  these  and  the 
alluvial  deposits.  Further  experience  led  him  to  separate 
an  intermediate  group  between  the  Primitive  and  the 
Floetz,  which  he  denominated  Transition.  He  believed 
that  this  group  was  "  deposited  during  the  passage  or 
transition  of  the  earth  from  its  chaotic  to  its  habitable 
state." 1  He  recognized  that  it  contains  the  earliest 
organic  remains,  and  believed  it  to  include  the  oldest 
mechanical  deposits.  He  subdivided  the  Transition 
rocks  rather  by  mineral  characters  than  by  ascertained 
stratigraphical  sequence.  The  hardened  variety  of  sand- 
stone called  greywacke  formed  by  far  the  most  important 
member  of  the  whole  series,  and  was  believed  by  Werner 
to  mark  a  new  geognostic  period  when,  instead  of  chemical 
precipitates,  mechanical  accumulations  began  to  appear. 

The  two  Wernerian  terms  Transition  and  Greywacke 
survived  for  some  years  after  the  commencement  of  the 
great  stratigraphical  revival  ^in  the  early  years  of  the 
present  century.  They  formed  a  kind  of  convenient  limbo 
or  No-man's  Land,  into  which  any  group  of  rocks  might  be 
thrown  which  obstinately  refused  to  reveal  its  relations 
with  the  rest  of  the  terrestrial  crust.  Down  to  the  base 
of  the  Carboniferous  rocks,  or  even  to  the  bottom  of  the  Old 
Eed  Sandstone,  the  chronological  succession  of  geological 
history  seemed  tolerably  clear.  But  beneath  and  beyond 

1  Jameson's  Geognosy,  p.  145  (1808). 


246  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

that  limit,  everything  betokened  disorder.  It  appeared 
well-nigh  hopeless  to  expect  that  rocks  so  broken  and 
indurated,  generally  so  poor  in  fossils,  and  usually  so 
sharply  cut  off  from  everything  younger  than  themselves, 
would  ever  be  made  to  yield  up  a  connected  and  con- 
sistent series  of  chapters  to  the  geological  record. 

And  yet  these  chapters,  if  only  they  could  be  written, 
would  be  found  to  possess  the  most  vivid  interest.  They 
would  contain  the  chronicles  of  the  earlier  ages  of  the 
earth's  history,  and  might  be  expected  to  reveal  the 
geography  of  the  first  dry  land,  the  sites  of  the  most 
ancient  seas,  the  positions  of  the  oldest  volcanoes,  the  forms 
of  the  first  plants  and  'animals  that  appeared  upon  the 
planet.  There  was  thus  inducement  enough  to  attack  the 
old  rocks  that  contained  within  their  stony  layers  such 
precious  memorials. 

It  is  not  that  the  Transition  rocks  were  entirely 
neglected.  The  keen  interest  awakened  in  fossils  led  to 
renewed  search  among  the  fossiliferous  members  of  that 
ancient  series.  A  large  number  of  organic  remains  had 
been  collected  from  Devonshire,  "Wales,  the  Lake  District, 
Khineland,  the  Eifel,  France,  Sweden,  Norway,  Kussia, 
as  well  as  from  New  York  and  Canada.  These  fossils 
were  distinct  from  those  of  the  Secondary  formations,  and 
they  were  obviously  distributed,  not  at  random,  but  in 
groups  which  reappeared  at  widely  separated  localities.1 

1  The  amount  and  nature  of  the  information  in  existence  regarding  the 
Transition  rocks  or  Greywacke,  at  the  time  when  Murchison  entered  upon 
their  investigation,  may  be  gathered  from  the  summaries  contained  in  the 
contemporary  general  treatises  on  Geology.  Even  as  late  as  the  spring  of 
1833,  Lyell,  after  devoting  about  300  pages  to  the  Tertiary  formations, 
dismissed  the  Palaeozoic  series  in  twelve  lines  (Principles  of  Geology,  vol. 
iii.  (1833),  p.  326).  One  of  the  fullest  descriptions  of  the  older  fossiliferous 


VI 


Mure  his  on  247 


As  yet,  however,  no  clue  had  been  found  to  their  strati- 
graphical  sequence.  Specimens  from  what  are  now  known 
as  Cambrian,  Silurian,  Devonian,  and  even  Lower  Car- 
boniferous strata  were  all  thrown  together  as  coming  from 
the  undefined  region  of  the  Greywacke  or  Transition  rocks. 
A  task  worthy  of  the  best  energy  of  the  most  accomplished 
geologist  lay  open  to  any  man  bold  enough  to  undertake 
to  introduce  among  these  rocks  the  same  stratigraphical 
method  which  had  reduced  the  Secondary  and  Tertiary 
formations  to  such  admirable  order,  and  had  furnished 
the  means  of  comparing  and  correlating  these  formations 
from  one  region  to  another.  This  task  was  at  last  accom- 
plished by  two  men,  working  independently  of  each  other  in 
Wales  and  the  border  counties  of  England.  Murchison  and 
Sedgwick  carried  the  principles  of  Cuvier,  Brongniart 
and  William  Smith  into  the  chaos  of  old  Greywacke,  and 
succeeded  in  adding  the  Devonian,  Silurian  and  Cambrian 
chapters  to  the  geological  record,  thus  establishing  a 
definite  order  among  the  oldest  fossiliferous  formations, 
and  completing  thereby  Palaeozoic  stratigraphy. 

Eoderick  Impey  Murchison  (1792-1871)  belonged  to  a 
family  that  had  lived  for  centuries  among  the  wilds  of  the 
north-western  Highlands  of  Scotland  and  had  taken  part 
in  much  of  the  rough  life  of  that  remote  and  savage  region.1 
He  was  born  in  1792,  entered  the  army  when  he  was  only 
fifteen  years  of  age,  and  served  for  a  time  in  the  Peninsular 

rocks,  with,  copious  lists  of  fossils,  will  be  found  in  the  first  edition  of  De  la 
Beche's  Geological  Manual  (1831),  p.  433,  under  the  head  of  "Grauwacke 
Group."  But  no  attempt  is  there  made  to  arrange  the  rocks  strati  - 
graphically,  and  the  fossil  lists  comprise  organisms  from  all  the  older 
Palaeozoic  formations  without  discrimination  of  their  horizon. 

1  The  biographical  details  are  taken  from  my  Life  of  Sir  Roderick  7. 
Murchison,  2  vols.  8vo,  1875. 


248  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

war.  He  carried  the  colours  of  his  regiment  at  the  battle 
of  Vimieira,  took  part  in  the  retreat  to  Corunna  and 
narrowly  escaped  being  taken  prisoner  by  the  French.  On 
the  conclusion  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  seeing  no  longer 
any  prospect  of  military  activity  or  distinction,  he  quitted 
the  army,  married,  and  for  some  years  devoted  himself 
with  ardour  to  fox-hunting,  in  which  his  love  of  an  open-air 
life  and  of  vigorous  exercise  could  have  full  gratification. 
But  he  was  made  for  a  nobler  kind  of  existence  than  that 
of  a  mere  Nimrod.  His  wife,  a  woman  of  cultivated  tastes, 
had  led  him  to  take  much  interest  in  art  and  antiquities, 
and  when  Sir  Humphry  Davy,  who  also  recognized  his 
qualities,  urged  him  to  turn  his  attention  to  science,  she 
strenuously  encouraged  him  to  follow  the  advice.  He  at 
last  sold  his  hunters,  came  to  London,  and  began  to  attend 
lectures  on  chemistry  and  geology  at  the  Eoyal  Institution. 
Murchison  was  thirty-two  years  old  before  he  showed 
any  interest'in  science.  But  his  ardent  and  active  tempera- 
ment spurred  him  on.  His  enthusiasm  was  thoroughly 
aroused,  and  his  progress  became  rapid.  He  joined  the 
Geological  Society,  and  having  gained  the  goodwill  of 
Buckland,  went  down  to  Oxford  for  his  first  geological 
excursions  under  the  guidance  of  that  genial  professor. 
He  then  discovered  what  field-geology  meant,  and  learnt 
how  the  several  parts  of  a  landscape  depend  for  their 
position  and  form  upon  the  nature  of  the  rocks  underneath. 
He  returned  to  London  with  his  zeal  aflame,  burning  to 
put  into  practice  the  principles  of  observation  he  had  now 
been  taught.  He  began  among  the  Cretaceous  formations 
around  his  father-in-law's  home  in  Sussex,  but  soon 
extended  his  explorations  into  Scotland,  France  and  the 


Murchison 


f  UNIVERSITY  \ 
\S09\^C  .r,;i;  *     2, 


Alps,  bringing  back  with  him  at  the  end  of  each  season  a 
bundle  of  well-filled  note-books  from  which  to  prepare 
communications  for  the  Geological  Society.  These  early 
papers,  meritorious  though  they  were,  do  not  call  for  any 
special  notice  here,  since  they  marked  no  new  departure  in 
geological  research,  nor  added  any  important  province  to 
the  geological  domain. 

During  six  years  of  constant  activity  in  the  field, 
Murchison  worked  out  with  Sedgwick  the  structure  of 
parts  of  the  west  and  north  of  Scotland  and  toiled  hard  in 
disentangling  the  complicated  structure  of  the  eastern 
Alps ;  he  also  rambled  with  Lyell  over  the  volcanic  areas 
of  Central  and  Southern  France.  Thereafter  he  deter-, 
mined  to  try  whether  the  "  interminable  grey  wacke,"  as  he 
called  it,  could  not  be  reduced  to  order  and  made  to  yield 
a  stratigraphical  sequence,  like  that  which  had  been  so 
successfully  obtained  among  younger  formations.  At  the 
time  when  he  began,  that  is,  in  the  summer  of  1831, 
absolutely  nothing  was  known  of  the  succession  of  rocks 
below  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone.  It  was  an  unknown  land,  a 
pathless  desert,  where  no  previous  traveller  had  been  able 
to  detect  any  trace  of  a  practicable  track  towards  order,  or 
any  clue  to  a  system  of  arrangement  that  would  enable  the 
older  fossiliferous  rocks  of  one  country  to  be  paralleled 
with  those  of  another. 

Starting  with  his  "  wife  and  maid,  two  good  grey  nags 
and  a  little  carriage,  saddles  being  strapped  behind  for 
occasional  equestrian  use,"  Murchison  made  his  way  into 
South  Wales.  In  that  region,  as  was  well  known,  the 
stratigraphical  series  could  be  followed  down  into  the  Old 
Red  Sandstone,  and  within  the  frame  or  border  of  that 


250  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

formation,  greywacke  was  believed  to  extend  over  all  the 
rest  of  the  Principality.  Let  me  quote  a  few  sentences  in 
which  Murchison  describes  his  first  entry  into  the  domain 
with  which  his  fame  is  now  so  inseparably  linked.  "  Tra- 
velling from  Brecon  to  Builth  by  the  Herefordshire  road, 
the  gorge  in  which  the  Wye  flows  first  developed  what  I 
had  not  till  then  seen.  Low  terrace-shaped  ridges  of  grey 
rock,  dipping  slightly  to  the  south-east,  appeared  on  the 
opposite  bank  of  the  Wye,  and  seemed  to  rise  quite  con- 
formably from  beneath  the  Old  Red  Sandstone  of  Hereford- 
shire. Boating  across  the  river  at  Cavansham  Ferry,  I 
rushed  up  to  these  ridges,  and,  to  my  inexpressible  joy, 
found  them  replete  with  Transition  fossils,  afterwards 
identified  with  those  at  Ludlow.  Here  then  was  a  key, 
and  if  I  could  only  follow  this  out  on  the  strike  of  the 
beds  to  the  north-east,  the  case  would  be  good."  * 

With  unerring  instinct  Murchison  had  realized  that  if 
the  story  of  old  Greywacke  was  ever  to  be  told,  a  begin- 
ning must  be  made  from  some  known  and  recognizable 
horizon.  It  would  have  been  well-nigh  useless  to  dive 
into  the  heart  of  the  Transition  hills  and  try  to  work  out 
their  complicated  structure,  for  even  if  a  sequence  could 
then  have  been  determined,  there  would  have  been  no 
means  of  connecting  it  with  the  already  ascertained  strati- 
graphical  series,  unless  it  could  be  followed  outwards  to 
the  Old  Red  Sandstone.  But  by  commencing  at  the 
known  base  of  that  series,  every  stage  conquered  was  at 
once  a  definite  platform  added  to  what  had  already  been 
established. 

The  explorer  kept  along  the  track   of  the  rocks   for 

1  Life,  vol.  i.  p.  182. 


VI 


Murchison  251 


many  miles  to  the  north.  No  hunter  could  have  followed 
the  scent  of  the  fox  better  than  he  did  the  outcrop  of 
the  fossiliferous  strata,  which  he  saw  to  come  out  regu- 
larly from  under  the  lowest  members  of  the  Old  Eed 
Sandstone.  Directed  to  the  Wye  by  Buckland,  he  had 
the  good-fortune  to  come  at  once  upon  some  of  the  few 
natural  sections  where  the  order  of  the  higher  Transi- 
tion rocks  of  Britain,  and  their  relations  to  the  overlying 
formations,  can  be  distinctly  seen.  He  pursued  the  chase 
northwards  until  he  lost  the  old  rocks  under  the  Triassic 
plains  of  Cheshire.  "  For  a  first  survey,"  he  writes,  "  I 
had  got  the  upper  grauwacke,  so  called,  into  my  hands, 
for  I  had  seen  it  in  several  situations  far  from  each  other, 
all  along  the  South  Welsh  frontier,  and  in  Shropshire  and 
Herefordshire,  rising  out  gradually  and  conformably  from 
beneath  the  lowest  member  of  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone. 
Moreover,  I  had  ascertained  that  its  different  beds  were 
characterized  by  peculiar  fossils,  ...  a  new  step  in  British 
geology.  In  summing  up  what  I  saw  and  realized  in 
about  four  months  of  travelling,  I  may  say  that  it  was 
the  most  fruitful  year  of  my  life,  for  in  it  I  laid  the 
foundation  of  my  Silurian  system.  I  was  then  thirty- 
nine  years  old,  and  few  could  excel  me  in  bodily  and 
mental  activity."  l 

Not  only  did  the  work  of  these  four  momentous  months 
mark  a  new  step  in  British  geology.  It  began  the  lifting 
of  the  veil  from  the  Transition  rocks  of  the  whole  globe.  It 
was  the  first  successful  foray  into  these  hitherto  intract- 
able masses,  and  prepared  the  way  for  all  that  has  since 
been  done  in  deciphering  the  history  of  the  most  ancient 

1  Op.  tit.  pp.  183,  192. 


252  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

fossiliferous  formations,  alike  in  the  Old  World  and  in  the 
New. 

Contenting  himself  with  a  mere  announcement  of  his 
chief  results  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  British  Association, 
held  in  York  in  1831,  Murchison  gave  a  brief  outline  of  his 
subdivisions  of  the  upper  Greywacke  to  the  Geological 
Society  in  the  spring  of  1833.1  He  continued  to  toil  hard 
in  the  field,  mapping  on  the  ground  his  various  formations, 
and  making  careful  sections  of  their  relations  to  each  other. 
Every  fresh  traverse  confirmed  the  general  accuracy  of 
his  first  observations,  and  supplied  him  with  further  illus- 
trations of  the  persistence  and  distinctness  of  the  several 
groups  into  which  he  ffad  subdivided  the  greywacke.  At 
the  beginning  of  1834,  he  was  able  to  present  a  revised  and 
corrected  table  of  his  stratigraphical  results,  each  formation 
being  defined  by  its  lithological  characters  and  organic 
remains,  and  the  subdivisions  being  nearly  what  they  still 
remain.2  The  Ludlow  rocks  are  shown  to  pass  upward 
into  the  base  of  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone,  and  downward  into 
the  Wenlock  group,  which  in  turn  is  succeeded  below  by 
the  Horderley  and  May  Hill  rocks,  followed  by  the  Builth 
and  Llandeilo  flags.  By  the  summer  of  1835,  at  the  insti- 
gation of  £lie  de  Beaumont  and  other  geological  friends, 
he  had  made  up  his  mind  as  to  the  name  that  should  be 
given  to  this  remarkable  assemblage  of  formations  which 
he  had  disinterred  from  out  of  the  chaos  of  greywacke. 
Following  the  good  rule  that  stratigraphical  terms  are  most 
fitly  formed  on  a  geographical  basis  with  reference  to  the 
regions  wherein  the  rocks  are  most  typically  developed,  he 

1  Proc.  Geol.  Soc.  vol.  i.  (1833),  p.  474. 
2  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  (1834),  p.  11. 


VI 


Murchison  253 


had  looked  about  for  some  appropriate  and  euphonious 
term  that  would  comprise  his  various  formations  and  con- 
nect them  with  that  borderland  of  England  and  Wales 
where  they  are  so  copiously  displayed.  This  territory  was 
in  Koman  times  inhabited  by  the  tribe  of  the  Silures,  and 
so  he  chose  the  term  Silurian — a  word  that  is  now  familiar 
to  the  geologists  of  every  country.1 

At  the  same  time  Murchison  published  a  diagrammatic 
section  of  his  classification  which,  except  in  one  particular, 
has  been  entirely  sustained  by  subsequent  investigation. 
He  there  groups  the  whole  series  of  formations  as  the 
Silurian  system,  which  he  divides  into  Upper  and  Lower, 
drawing  the  line  of  separation  where  it  still  remains.  In 
the  upper  section  come  the  Ludlow  and  Wenlock  rocks ; 
in  the  lower  the  Caradoc  and  Llandeilo.  The  base  of  the 
series,  however,  is  made  to  rest  unconformably  on  a  series 
of  ancient  slaty  greywackes.  No  such  base  exists,  for  the 
Llandeilo  group  passes  downward  into  a  vast  series  of  older 
sediments.  At  that  time,  however,  both  Murchison  and 
Sedgwick  believed  that  a  strongly  marked  separation  lay 
between  the  Silurian  System  and  the  rocks  lying  to  the 
west  of  it. 

Murchison  used  to  maintain,  with  perfect  justice,  that 
he  had  succeeded  in  his  task,  because  he  had  followed 
the  method  which  had  led  William  Smith  to  arrange  so 
admirably  the  Secondary  formations  of  England.  He  was 
able  to  show  that,  apart  from  mere  lithological  differences, 
which  might  be  of  only  local  value,  his  formations  were 
definitely  characterized,  each  by  its  peculiar  assemblage  of 
organic  remains.  If  Smith's  labours  had  not  only  brought 

1  Phil.  Mag.  July  1835,  p.  48. 


254  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  Mesozoic  rocks  of  England  into  order,  but  had  furnished 
a  means  of  dealing  in  like  fashion  with  the  rocks  of 
the  same  age  in  other  countries,  there  seemed  no  reason 
why  the  paleeontological  succession,  found  to  distinguish 
the  greywacke  in  England  and  Wales,  should  not  be 
equally  serviceable  among  the  Transition  rocks  of  Europe 
and  even  of  America.  Murchison  had  thus  added  a 
series  of  new  and  earlier  chapters  to  the  geological  history 
of  the  globe. 

The  various  brief  communications  to  the  Geological 
Society,  after  the  first  discoveries  in  1831,  though 
they  had  made  geologists  familiar  with  the  main  results 
of  Murchison's  work,  wnly  increased  their  desire  to  know 
the  detailed  observations  on  which  it  was  founded,  and 
more  particularly  to  have  complete  information  as  to  the 
assemblages  of  organic  remains  which  he  had  discovered. 
Previous  collections  from  the  Transition  rocks  were 
generally  of  little  service  for  stratigraphical  purposes, 
because  those  of  widely  separate  horizons  had  all 
been  mixed  together.  But  Murchison's  specimens  had 
been  carefully  gathered,  with  the  view  of  sustaining  his 
classification,  and  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  basis  of 
comparison  between  the  Transition  rocks  of  Britain  and 
those  of  other  countries.  Early  in  the  course  of  his 
wanderings  along  the  Welsh  border,  he  had  been  urged  to 
prepare  a  full  and  more  generally  accessible  account  of 
his  labours  than  was  offered  in  the  publications  of  a 
learned  Society.  Accordingly,  adding  this  task  to  his 
other  engagements,  he  toiled  at  the  making  of  a  big  book, 
until  at  last,  towards  the  end  of  the  year  1838,  that  is, 
about  seven  years  from  the  time  when  he  broke  ground 


Murchison  255 


by  the  banks  of  the  Wye,  he  published  his  great  work, 
The  Silurian  System,  a  massive  quarto  of  800  pages,  with 
an  atlas  of  plates  of  fossils  and  sections,  and  a  large 
coloured  geological  map. 

The  publication  of  this  splendid  monograph  forms  a 
notable  epoch  in  the  history  of  modern  geology,  and  well 
entitles  its  author  to  be  enrolled  among  the  founders  of 
the  science.  For  the  first  time,  the  succession  of  fossili- 
ferous  formations  below  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone  was 
shown  in  detail.  Their  fossils  were  enumerated,  described 
and  figured.  It  was  now  possible  to  carry  the  vision 
across  a  vast  series  of  ages,  of  which  hitherto  no  definite 
knowledge  existed,  to  mark  the  succession  of  their 
organisms,  and  thus  to  trace  backward,  far  farther  than 
had  ever  before  been  possible,  the  history  of  organized 
existence  on  this  globe. 

While  carefully  working  out  the  stratigraphy  of  the 
rocks,  Murchison  had  come  upon  various  masses  of  erup- 
tive rock.  Some  of  these  he  recognized  as  intrusive,  others 
he  saw  to  be  lavas  and  ashes  which  had  been  ejected  over 
the  floor  of  the  ancient  ocean.  In  this  way  he  was  able  to 
present  a  picture  of  extraordinary  interest,  in  which  the 
geologist  could  mark  the  position  of  the  old  seas,  trace  the 
distribution  of  their  organisms,  and  note  the  sites  of  their 
volcanoes. 

Even  before  the  advent  of  his  volume,  his  remarkable 
results  had  become  widely  known,  and  had  incited  other 
observers  all  over  the  world  to  attack  the  forbidding 
domain  of  Greywacke.  In  France,  his  classification  had 
been  adopted,  and  applied  to  the  elucidation  of  the  older 
fossiliferous  rocks  by  Elie  de  Beaumont  and  Dufrenoy,  who 


256  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

were  engaged  in  constructing  a  geological  map  of  that 
country.  In  Turkey  it  had  been  similarly  made  available 
by  Boue  and  De  Verneuil.  Forchhammer  had  extended 
it  to  Scandinavia.  Featherstonehaugh  and  Eogers  had 
applied  it  in  the  United  States.  Thus  within  a  few  years, 
the  Silurian  system  was  found  to  be  developed  in  all  parts 
of  the  world,  and  Murchison's  work  furnished  the  key  to 
its  interpretation. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  researches  that  were  in  progress 
by  another  great  master  of  English  geology,  simultaneously 
with  those  of  Murchison.  Adam  Sedgwick  (1*785-1873) 
belonged  to  a  family  that  had  been  settled  for  300  years  or 
more  in  the  Dale  of  Dent,  a  picturesque  district  which  lies 
along  the  western  border  of  Yorkshire.  To  the  end  of  his 
long  and  active  life  his  heart  ever  turned  with  fondness  to 
the  little  valley  where  he  first  saw  the  light,  and  to  the 
kindly  dalesmen  among  whom  he  spent  his  boyhood.  He 
remained  to  the  end  a  true  dalesman  himself,  with  all  the 
frankness  of  nature,  mirthfulness  and  loyalty,  so  often 
found  among  the  natives  of  these  pastoral  uplands.  He 
was  born  in  the  year  1785,  his  father  being  the  Vicar  of 
Dent.  After  receiving  his  school  education  at  the  neigh- 
bouring little  town  of  Sedbergh,  he  went  to  Trinity 
College,  Cambridge,  which  thenceforth  became  his  home 
to  the  end  of  his  life.  At  the  age  of  thirty-three  he  was 
elected  to  the  Woodwardian  Professorship  of  Geology.  Up 
to  that  time,  however,  he  had  shown  no  special  interest  in 
geological  pursuits,  and  though  he  may  have  read  a  little  on 
the  subject,  his  knowledge  of  it  was  probably  not  greater 
than  that  of  the  average  college  Fellow  of  his  day.  His 
appointment  as  Professor,  however,  awakened  his  dormant 


VI 


Sedgwick  257 


scientific  proclivities,  and  he  at  once  threw  himself  with 
all  his  energy  and  enthusiasm  into  the  duties  of  his  new 
vocation.  Gifted  with  mental  power  of  no  common  order, 
which  had  been  sedulously  trained  in  a  wide  range  of 
studies,  with  a  keen  eye  for  the  geological  structure  of  a 
region,  and  with  abundant  bodily  prowess  to  sustain  him  in 
the  most  arduous  exertions  in  the  field,  eloquent,  witty, 
vivacious,  he  took  at  once  the  place  of  prominence  in  the 
University  which  he  retained  to  the  last,  and  he  came 
with  rapid  strides  to  the  front  of  all  who  in  that  day 
cultivated  the  infant  science  of  geology  in  England. 

What  little  geology  Sedgwick  knew,  when  he  became  a 
professor  of  the  science,  seems  to  have  been  of  a  decidedly 
Wernerian  kind.  He  began  his  geological  writings  with 
an  account  of  the  primitive  ridge  and  its  associated  rocks  in 
Devon  and  Cornwall.  His  earliest  paper  might  have  been 
appropriately  printed  in  the  first  volume  of  the  Memoirs  of 
the  Wernerian  Society.  In  later  years,  referring  to  his 
Neptunist  beginnings,  he  confessed  that  "  for  a  long  while 
I  was  troubled  with  water  on  the  brain,  but  light  and  heat 
have  completely  dissipated  it,"  and  he  spoke  of  "  the  Wer- 
nerian nonsense  I  learnt  in  my  youth." l  It  was  by  his 
own  diligent  work  in  the  field  that  he  came  to  a  true  per- 
ception of  geological  principles.  His  excursions  carried 
him  all  over  England,  and  enabled  him  to  bring  back  each 
season  a  quantity  of  specimens  for  his  museum,  and  a 
multitude  of  notes  from  which  he  regaled  the  Cambridge 
Philosophical  Society  with  an  account  of  his  doings. 
Eventually  he  joined  the  Geological  Society  of  London, 

1  Life  and  Letters  of  Adam  Sedgwick,  by  J.  W.   Clark  and  T.  M'K. 
Hughes,  vol.  i.  p.  284. 


258  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

and  found  there  a  wider  field  of  action.  After  a  time 
Murchison  also  became  a  fellow  of  the  Society,  and  he  and 
Sedgwick  soon  formed  a  close  intimacy.  This  friendship 
proved  to  be  of  signal  service  to  the  cause  of  geological 
progress.  The  two  associates  were  drawn  towards  the 
same  departments  of  investigation.  They  began  their 
co-operation  in  the  year  1827  by  a  journey  through  the 
west  and  north  of  Scotland,  and  from  that  time  onward  for 
many  years  they  were  constantly  working  together  in 
Britain  and  on  the  Continent  of  Europe. 

It  would  be  interesting,  but  out  of  place  here,  to  linger 
over  the  various  conjoint  labours  of  these  two  great 
pioneers  in  Palaeozoic  geology.  We  are  only  concerned 
with  what  they  did,  separately  and  in  conjunction,  towards 
the  enlargement  of  the  geological  record  and  the  definite 
establishment  of  the  Pal£eozoic  systems.  Sedgwick  began 
his  work  among  the  older  fossiliferous  formations  by 
attacking  the  rugged  and  complicated  region  of  Cumber- 
land and  Westmoreland,  commonly  known  as  the  Lake 
District,  and  in  a  series  of  papers  communicated  to  the 
Geological  Society  he  worked  out  the  general  structure  of 
that  difficult  tract  of  country.  Though  fossils  had  been 
found  in  the  rocks,  he  did  not  at  first  make  use  of 
them  for  purposes  of  stratigraphical  classification.  He 
ascertained  the  succession  of  the  great  groups  of  strata  by 
noting  their  lithological  characters.  One  of  the  most 
remarkable  features  of  his  investigation  was  the  recogni- 
tion of  volcanic  rocks  intercalated  among  the  ancient 
marine  sediments  of  the  Lake  District.  These  rocks,  since 
so  fully  worked  out,  and  now  known  as  the  "  Borrowdale 
Volcanic  Series,"  of  Lower  Silurian  age,  were  first  assigned 


vi  Sedgwick  and  Murchison  259 

to  their  true  origin  by  Sedgwick,  who  thus  made  an 
important  contribution  to  the  progress  of  volcanic 
geology. 

By  a  curious  coincidence,  Sedgwick  and  Murchison 
broke  ground  in  Wales  during  the  same  summer  of  1831. 
But  while  Murchison  determined  to  work  his  way  down- 
ward, from  the  known  horizons  of  the  Old  Ked  Sandstone 
of  South  Wales  into  the  greywacke  below,  Sedgwick,  with 
characteristic  dash,  made  straight  for  the  highest,  ruggedest 
and  most  complicated  tract  of  North  Wales.  Eeturning 
to  the  same  ground  the  following  year,  he  plunged  into 
the  intricacies  of  the  older  Palaeozoic  rocks,  and  succeeded 
in  disentangling  their  structure,  tracing  out  their  flexures 
and  dislocations,  and  ascertaining  the  general  sequence  of 
their  principal  subdivisions.  It  was  a  splendid  achieve- 
ment, which  probably  no  other  man  in  England  at  that 
time  could  have  accomplished. 

But  valuable  as  this  work  was,  as  a  contribution  to  the 
elucidation  of  the  tectonic  geology  of  a  part  of  Britain, 
it  had  not  yet  acquired  importance  in  general  stratigraphy. 
In  the  first  place,  Sedgwick's  groups  of  strata  were  mere 
lithological  aggregates.  They  possessed  as  yet  no  distinc- 
tive characters  that  would  allow  of  their  being  adopted 
in  the  interpretation  of  other  countries,  or  even  of 
distant  parts  of  Britain.  They  contained  fossils,  but  these 
had  not  been  made  use  of  in  denning  the  subdivisions. 
There  was  thus  neither  a  basis  for  comparison  with  other 
regions,  nor  for  the  ascertainment  of  the  true  position  of 
the  North  Welsh  rocks  in  the  great  territory  of  Greywacke. 
In  the  second  place,  there  was  no  clue  to  the  connection 
of  these  rocks  with  any  known  formation,  for  they  were 


260  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

separated  from  everything  younger  than  themselves  by  a 
strong  unconformability.  The  Carboniferous  and  Old 
Eed  Sandstone  strata  were  found  to  lie  on  the  upturned 
edges  of  the  older  masses,  and  it  was  impossible  to  say  how 
many  intervening  formations  were  missing. 

Murchison's  researches  brought  to  light  the  actual 
transition  from  the  base  of  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone  into  an 
older  series  of  fossiliferous  formations  underneath.  There 
could,  therefore,  be  no  doubt  that  part  at  least  of  his 
Silurian  system  was  younger  than  Sedgwick's  series  in 
North  Wales.  And  as  he  found  what  appeared  to  be 
older  strata  emerging  from  underneath  his  system,  and 
seeming  to  stretch  indefinitely  into  the  heart  of  Wales,  he 
naturally  believed  these  strata  to  be  part  of  his  friend's 
domain,  and  at  first  left  them  alone.  Such,  too,  was  Sedg- 
wick's original  impression.  The  two  fellow -workers  had 
not  drawn  a  definite  boundary  between  their  respective 
territories,  but  they  agreed  that  the  Silurian  series  was 
less  ancient  than  the  rocks  of  North  Wales. 

As  a  distinct  name  had  been  given  to  the  younger 
series,  Murchison  urged  his  associate  to  choose  an  ap- 
propriate designation  for  the  older,  and  in  the  summer  of 
1835  the  term  "Cambrian"  was  selected.1  By  this  time 
Murchison  had  learnt  that  no  hard  and  fast  line  was  to 
to  be  drawn  between  the  bottom  of  the  Silurian  and  the 
top  of  the  Cambrian  series.  "  In  South  Wales  he  had 
traced  many  distinct  passages  from  the  lowest  member  of 
the  '  Silurian  system '  into  the  underlying  slaty  rocks  now 

1  Brit.  Assoc.  August  1835,  Phil.  Mag.  vol.  vii.  (December  1835),  p. 
483,  "On  the  Silurian  and  Cambrian  Systems  "  by  A.  Sedgwiek  and  R, 
I.  Murchison. 


vr  SedgwicKs  Cambrian  System  261 

named  by  Professor  Sedgwick  the  Upper  Cainbriaii." 
Sedgwick,  on  the  other  hand,  confessed  that  neither  in  the 
Lake  District  nor  in  North  Wales  was  the  stratigraphical 
succession  unbroken,  and  that  in  these  regions  it  was  im- 
possible to  tell  "  how  many  terms  are  wanting  to  complete 
the  series  to  the  Old  Bed  Sandstone  and  Carboniferous 
Limestone."1  He  adopted  a  threefold  subdivision  into 
Lower,  Middle,  and  Upper  Cambrian,  but  this  classification 
rested  merely  on  mineral  characters,  no  attempt  having 
yet  been  made  by  Sedgwick  to  determine  how  far  each  of 
his  subdivisions  was  defined  by  distinctive  fossils. 

Eventually  it  was  ascertained  that  the  organic  remains 
in  the  upper  part  of  the  Cambrian  system  were  the  same 
as  those  found  in  the  Lower  Silurian  formations  as  defined 
by  Murchison.  It  was  obvious  that  the  one  series  was 
really  the  equivalent  of  the  other,  and  that  they  ought  not 
to  be  classed  under  separate  names.  The  officers  of  the 
Geological  Survey,  working  from  the  clearly  defined 
Silurian  formations,  could  draw  no  line  between  these  and 
those  of  North  Wales,  which  Sedgwick  had  classed  as 
Cambrian.  Finding  the  same  fossils  in  both,  they  felt 
themselves  constrained  to  class  them  all  under  the  same 
designation  of  Silurian.  Murchison,  of  course,  had  no 
objection  to  the  indefinite  extension  of  his  system.  Sedg- 
wick, however,  after  some  delay,  protested  against  what 
he  considered  to  be  an  unjustifiable  appropriation  of  terri- 
tory which  he  had  himself  conquered.  And  thus  arose  a 
misunderstanding  between  these  two  old  comrades,  which 
deepened  ere  long  into  a  permanent  estrangement. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  enter  here  into  the  details  of 

1  Op.  dt. 


262  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

this  unhappy  controversy.1  My  only  object  in  referring 
to  it  is  to  point  out  how  far  we  are  indebted  to  Sedg- 
wick  for  the  establishment  of  the  Cambrian  system.  He 
eventually  traced  through  a  part  of  the  Welsh  border  a 
marked  unconformability  between  the  Upper  Silurian  for- 
mations and  everything  below  them,  and  he  proposed  that 
his  Cambrian  system  should  be  carried  up  to  that  physical 
break  and  thus  include  Murchison's  Lower  Silurian  forma- 
tions. But  as  these  formations  had  been  denned  strati- 
graphically  and  palseontologically  before  he  had  been 
able  to  get  his  fossils  from  North  Wales  examined,  they 
obviously  had  the  right  of  priority.  And  the  general 
verdict  of  geologists  wenf  in  favour  of  Murchison. 

While  this  dispute  was  in  progress  in  Britain,  a  re- 
markable series  of  investigations  by  Joachim  Barrande 
had  made  known  the  extraordinary  abundance  and  variety 
of  Silurian  fossils  in  Bohemia.  This  distinguished  observer 
not  only  recognized  the  equivalents  of  Murchison's  Upper 
and  Lower  Silurian  series,  but  found  below  that  series 
a  still  older  group  of  strata,  characterized  by  a  different 
assemblage  of  fossils,  which  he  termed  the  first  or  prim- 
ordial fauna.  It  was  ascertained  that  representatives  of 
this  fauna  occurred  in  Wales  among  some  of  the  divisions 
of  Sedgwick's  Cambrian  system,  far  below  the  Llandeilo 
group  which  formed  the  original  base  of  the  Silurian  series. 
Eventually,  therefore,  since  the  death  of  the  two  great 
disputants,  there  has  been  a  general  consensus  of  opinion 
that  the  top  of  the  Cambrian  system  should  be  drawn  at 
the  upper  limit  of  the  primordial  fauna.2 

1  I  have  already  given  a  full  and,  I  believe,  impartial  account  of  it  in 
my  Life  of  Murchison. 

2  It  has  been  proposed  by  Professor  Lapworth  that  the  strata  named 


VI 


The  Cambrian  and  Silurian  Systems      263 


By  this  arrangement,  Sedgwick's  name  is  retained  for 
an  enormously  thick  and  varied  succession  of  strata  which 
possess  the  deepest  interest,  because  they  contain  the 
earliest  records  yet  discovered  of  organized  existence  on  the 
surface  of  our  globe.  It  was  Sedgwick  who  first  arranged 
the  successive  groups  of  strata  in  North  Wales,  from  the 
Bala  and  Arenig  rocks  down  into  the  depths  of  the  Har- 
lech  anticline.  His  classification,  though  it  has  undergone 
some  slight  modification,  remains  to  this  day  essentially  as  he 
left  it.  And  thus  the  name  which  he  selected  for  his  system, 
and  which  has  become  one  of  the  household  words  in  geo- 
logical literature,  remains  with  us  a  memorial  of  one  of  the 
most  fearless,  strenuous,  gentle  and  lovable  of  all  the  master 
minds  who  have  shaped  our  science  into  its  present  form. 

By  the  establishment  of  the  Cambrian  and  Silurian 
systems  a  vast  stride  was  made  in  the  process  of  reducing 
the  chaos  of  grey  wacke  into  settled  order.  But  there  still 
remained  a  series  of  rocks  in  that  chaos  which  could  not 
be  claimed  as  either  Cambrian  or  Silurian  and  did  not 
yield  fossils  which  would  show  them  to  be  Carboniferous. 
Before  any  dispute  arose  between  Sedgwick  and  Murchison 
as  to  the  respective  limits  of  their  domains  in  Wales, 
they  were  led  to  undertake  a  conjoint  investigation  which 
resulted  in  the  creation  of  the  Devonian  system.  The 
story  of  the  addition  of  this  third  chapter  to  early 
Palaeozoic  history  may  be  briefly  told. 

by  Murchison  Lower  Silurian  and  claimed  by  Sedgwick  as  Upper  Cam- 
brian, should  be  taken  from  both  and  be  given  a  new  name,  "  Ordovician." 
But  this  proposal  is  fair  to  neither  disputant.  By  all  the  laws  that 
regulate  scientific  priority  the  strata  which  were  first  separated  by 
Murchison  and  distinguished  by  their  fossils,  should  retain  the  name  of 
Lower  Silurian  which  he  gave  them. 


264  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

It  had  long  been  known  that  greywacke  or  Transition 
rocks  covered  most  of  the  counties  of  Devon  and  Cornwall. 
Closer  examination  of  that  region  had  shown  that  a  con- 
siderable tract  of  greywacke,  now  known  as  Culm-measures, 
contained  abundant  carbonaceous  material  and  even 
yielded  fossil  plants  that  appeared  to  be  identical  with 
some  of  those  in  the  Carboniferous  system.  It  was  at  first 
supposed  by  De  la  Beche  that  these  plant-bearing  rocks 
lay  below  the  rest  of  the  greywacke  of  that  part  of  the 
country.  Murchison,  however,  from  the  evidence  of  his 
clear  sections  in  the  Silurian  territory,  felt  convinced  that 
there  must  be  some  mistake  in  regard  to  the  supposed 
position  of  these  rocks,  ft)r  he  had  traversed  all  the  upper 
greywacke  along  the  Welsh  border,  and  had  found  it  to 
contain  no  land-plants  at  all,  but  to  be  full  of  marine 
shells.  He  induced  Sedgwick  to  join  him  in  an  expedition 
into  Devonshire.  The  two  associates,  in  the  course  of  the 
year  1836,  completely  succeeded  in  proving  that  the  Culm- 
measures,  or  Carboniferous  series,  lay  not  below  but  above 
the  rest  of  the  greywacke  of  the  south-west  of  England. 
But  what  was  that  greywacke  and  what  relation  did  it  bear 
to  the  rocks  which  had  been  reduced  to  system  in  Wales  ? 

The  structure  of  the  ground  in  the  south-west  of  Eng- 
land is  by  no  means  simple,  and,  indeed,  is  not  completely 
understood  even  now.  The  rocks  have  been  much  folded, 
cleaved  and  crushed.  But  besides  these  subsequent  changes, 
they  present  a  great  contrast  in  their  lithological  characters 
to  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
Bristol  Channel.  Neither  Sedgwick  nor  Murchison  could 
find  any  analogy  between  the  Devonshire  greywacke  and 
the  red  sandstones,  conglomerates  and  marls  which  expand 


vi        Establishment  of  the  Devonian  System     265 

into  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone  of  South  Wales,  and  lie  so 
clearly  between  the  Carboniferous  Limestone  above  and 
the  Upper  Silurian  formations  below.  Nor  could  Murchi- 
son  see  a  resemblance  between  that  grey  wacke,  or  its  fossils, 
and  any  of  his  Silurian  rocks.  With  their  twisted  and 
indurated  aspect,  the  Devonshire  rocks  looked  so  much 
older  than  the  gently  inclined  Silurian  groups  by  the  banks 
of  the  Wye,  that  both  he  and  Sedgwick  thought  they  more 
resembled  the  crumpled  and  broken  rocks  of  North  Wales, 
and  they  accordingly  first  placed  them  in  the  upper  and 
middle  parts  of  the  Cambrian  system.1 

This  correlation,  however,  was  made  mainly  on  litho- 
logical  grounds.  The  Devonshire  rocks  were  not  without 
fossils,  and  considerable  collections  of  these  had  already 
been  gathered  by  different  residents  in  the  county,  but  no 
one  had  yet  endeavoured  to  make  a  comparison  between 
them  and  those  of  known  stratigraphical  horizons  else- 
where. This  task  was  undertaken  at  last  by  William 
Lonsdale,  who  towards  the  end  of  the  year  1837  came  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  greywacke  and  limestone  of 
South  Devonshire,  judged  by  their  fossil  contents,  must  be 
intermediate  between  the  Silurian  and  the  Carboniferous 
formations,  that  is,  on  the  parallel  of  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone 
of  other  parts  of  Britain. 

Such  a  decision  from  a  skilled  paleontologist  raised  up 
some  serious  difficulties,  which  completely  nonplussed  the 
two  able  geologists  who  the  year  before  had  gone  so  gaily 
down  to  the  south-west  of  England  to  set  matters  right 
there.  It  seemed  to  them  as  if  Lonsdale's  opinion  was 
opposed  to  what  had  been  regarded  as  definitely  settled  in 

1  Proc.  Geol.  Soc.  ii.  (1837),  p.  560. 


266  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

the  stratigraphy  of  the  older  stratified  rocks.  For  two 
years  they  continued  in  complete  uncertainty  as  to  the 
solution  of  the  problem.  But  at  last  after  the  examination 
of  innumerable  specimens,  endless  discussion,  and  inter- 
minable correspondence,  they  came  to  adopt  Lonsdale's 
views.  They  saw  that  the  abundantly  fossiliferous  rocks 
of  South  Devon  contained,  in  their  lower  members,  fossils 
that  reminded  them  of  Silurian  types,  while  in  their 
upper  members,  they  yielded  species  that  were  common 
also  to  the  Carboniferous  Limestone.  The  two  geologists 
therefore  recognized  in  these  rocks  an  intermediate  series 
of  strata,  containing  a  fauna  which  must  have  flourished 
between  the  Silurian  and  the  Carboniferous  periods.  That 
fauna  was  not  represented  in  the  Old  Eed  Sandstone, 
which,  with  its  traces  of  land -plants  and  remains  of 
ganoid  fishes,  appeared  to  have  been  accumulated  under 
other  geographical  conditions.  To  distinguish  the  series 
of  rocks  containing  this  well-marked  facies  of  marine 
organisms,  they  chose  the  name  "Devonian,"  from  the 
county  where  they  were  originally  studied  and  where 
their  true  position  was  first  ascertained.1  The  authors 
claimed  that  the  establishment  of  the  Devonian  system 
was  "undoubtedly  the  greatest  change  which  has  ever 
been  attempted  at  one  time  in  the  classification  of  British 
rocks."  But  it  was  far  more  than  that.  It  was  the 
determination  of  a  new  geological  series  of  world-wide 
significance,  the  unfolding  of  a  new  chapter  in  the  geo- 
logical annals  of  our  globe.  Soon  after  Sedgwick  and 
Murchison  had  finally  announced  to  the  Geological 
Society  their  reform  of  the  geology  of  Devonshire,  they 

1  Trans.  Geol.  Soc.,  2nd  ser.  vol.  v.  pp.  688,  701  (April  1839). 


VI 


Personal  Traits  of  Murchison  267 


started  for  Ehineland,  the  Harz  and  Fichtelgebirge,  and 
succeeded  in  demonstrating  that  the  Devonian  system  is 
more  extensively  and  completely  developed  there  than  in 
its  original  Devonshire  home. 

I  have  dwelt  on  the  labours  of  Sedgwick  and 
Murchison  which  more  especially  place  their  names 
among  those  of  the  founders  of  geology.  But  besides 
these  exploits  they  each  accomplished  a  vast  amount 
of  admirable  work,  and  helped  thereby  to  widen  the 
bounds  and  strengthen  the  foundations  of  the  science  to 
which  they  devoted  their  lives.  To  enter  upon  the 
consideration  of  these  further  achievements,  however, 
would  lead  us  far  beyond  the  limits  of  our  time. 

Murchison  succeeded  De  la  Beche  as  Director-General 
of  the  Geological  Survey  of  Great  Britain,  and  held  that 
office  until  his  death  in  1871.  To  the  last,  he  retained 
the  erect  military  bearing  of  his  youth,  and  even  under 
the  weight  of  threescore  years  and  ten  could  walk  a  dozen 
of  miles  and  keep  a  keen  eye  on  all  the  topographical  and 
geological  features  of  the  surrounding  hills.  Tall  and 
dignified  in  manner,  with  much  of  the  formal  courtesy  of 
an  older  time,  he  might  seem  to  those  who  only  casually 
met  him  to  be  proud  or  even  haughty.  But  under  this  outer 
crust,  which  soon  dropped  away  in  friendly  intercourse, 
there  lay  a  friendly  and  helpful  nature.  Indomitable  in 
his  power  of  work,  restless  in  his  eager  energy  in  the 
pursuit  of  his  favourite  science,  full  of  sympathies  for 
realms  of  knowledge  outside  of  his  own  domain,  wielding 
wide  influence  from  his  social  position,  he  did  what  no 
other  man  of  his  time  could  do  so  well  for  the  advance  of 
science  in  England.  And  his  death  at  the  ripe  age  of 


268  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

seventy-nine  left  a  blank  in  that  country  which  has  never 
since  been  filled. 

Sedgwick  was  in  many  respects  a  contrast  to  Murchison. 
His  powerful  frame  reminded  one  of  the  race  of  dalesmen 
from  which  he  sprang.  His  eagle  eyes  seemed  as  if  they 
could  pierce  into  the  very  heart  of  the  stiffest  geological 
problem.  In  his  prime,  he  always  made  straight  for  the 
roughest  ground,  the  steepest  slopes,  or  the  highest  summits, 
and  his  bodily  strength  bore  him  bravely  through  incredible 
exertion.  Unfortunately  his  health,  always  uncertain, 
would  react  on  his  spirits,  and  times  of  depression  and 
lethargy  would  come  to  interrupt  and  retard  his  work, 
whether  with  hammer  or  pen.  But  even  his  gloomiest 
fits  he  could  turn  into  merriment,  and  he  would  laugh  at 
them  and  at  himself,  as  he  described  his  condition  to  some 
friend.  His  gaiety  of  spirit  made  him  the  centre  and 
life  of  every  company  of  which  he  formed  part.  His 
frank  manliness,  his  kindliness  of  heart,  his  transparent 
childlike  simplicity,  his  unwearied  helpfulness  and  his 
gentle  tenderness,  combined  to  form  a  character  altogether 
apart.  He  was  admired  for  his  intellectual  grasp,  his 
versatility,  and  his  eloquence,  and  he  was  beloved,  almost 
worshipped,  for  the  overflowing  goodness  of  his  char- 
acter. 

When  in  the  early  part  of  this  century,  one  discovery 
after  another  was  made  which  showed  that  Werner's  so- 
called  Primitive  rocks  reappeared  among  his  Transition 
and  Floetz  formations,  a  doubt  began  to  arise  whether 
there  were  any  primitive  rocks  at  all.1  We  have  traced 

1  Thus  D'Aubuisaon  wrote  in  1819 — "Geology  no  longer  possesses  a 
single  rock  essentially  primitive"  (TraiUde  Geognosie,  tome  ii.  p.  197). 


vi  William  Edmond  Logan  269 

how  Murchison  and  Sedgwick  cleared  up  the  confusion  of 
the  Transition  series  and  created  the  Devonian,  Silurian 
and  Cambrian  systems.  In  Wales  certain  schists  had 
been  detected  by  Sedgwick  below  his  Cambrian  rocks,  but 
they  did  not  greatly  interest  him,  and  he  never  tried  to 
make  out  their  structure  and  history.  Afterwards  A.  C. 
Eamsay  and  his  associates  claimed  these  schists  as  meta- 
morphosed parts  of  the  Cambrian  system.  To  this  day 
their  true  position  has  not  been  settled  further  than  that 
they  are  known  to  be  pre-Cambrian. 

The  vast  and  varied  series  of  rocks,  which  have  now 
been  ascertained  to  underlie  the  oldest  Cambrian  strata, 
have  undergone  much  scrutiny  during  the  last  quarter  of 
a  century,  and  their  true  nature  and  sequence  are  begin- 
ning to  be  understood.  The  first  memorable  onward  step 
in  this  investigation  was  taken  in  North  America  by 
William  Edmond  Logan  (1798-1875).  Many  years  before 
his  time,  the  existence  of  ancient  gneisses  and  schists  had 
been  recognized  both  in  the  United  States  and  in  Canada. 
At  the  very  beginning  of  the  century,  the  wide  extent  of 
these  rocks  had  been  noted  by  W.  Maclure,  the  father 
of  American  geology,  who  was  the  first  to  produce  a 
general  geological  sketch-map  of  a  large  part  of  the 
United  States.  In  1824  and  afterwards,  Bigsby  spent 
much  time  among  these  rocks  to  the  north  of  Lake 
Superior.  Subsequently  the  gneisses  of  the  Adirondack 
Hills  were  described  by  Eaton.  At  the  very  beginning  of 
his  connection  with  the  Geological  Survey  of  Canada  in 
1843,  Logan  confirmed  the  observation  that  the  oldest 
fossiliferous  formations  of  North  America  lie  unconform- 
ably  on  a  vast  series  of  gneisses  and  other  crystalline 


2  7o  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

rocks,  to  which  he  continued  at  first  to  apply  the  old  term 
Primary.  By  degrees,  as  he  saw  more  evidence  of  parallel 
structures  in  these  masses,  he  thought  that  they  were 
probably  altered  sediments,  and  he  referred  to  them  as 
Metamorphic.  That  portion  of  the  series  which  includes 
thick  bands  of  limestone  he  proposed  to  consider  as  a 
separate  and  overlying  group.  In  the  course  of  years, 
working  with  his  associates  Alexander  Murray  and  Sterry 
Hunt,  he  was  able  to  show  the  enormous  extent  of  these 
primary  rocks,  covering  as  they  do  several  hundred 
thousand  square  miles  of  the  North  American  continent 
and  stretching  northwards  to  the  borders  of  the  Arctic 
Ocean.  He  proposed  for  these  most  ancient  mineral 
masses  the  general  appellation  of  Laurentian,  from  their 
development  among  the  Laurentide  mountains.  After- 
wards he  thought  it  possible  to  subdivide  them  into  three 
separate  groups,  which  he  designated  Upper,  Middle  and 
Lower.  In  the  course  of  his  progress,  he  came  upon  a 
series  of  hard  slates  and  conglomerates,  containing  pebbles 
and  boulders  of  the  gneiss,  and  evidently  of  more  recent 
origin,  yet  nowhere,  so  far  as  he  could  see,  separable  by 
an  undoubted  unconformability.  These  rocks,  being  ex- 
tensively displayed  along  the  northern  shores  of  Lake 
Huron,  he  named  Huronian.  He  afterwards  described  a 
second  series  of  copper-bearing  rocks  lying  unconformably 
on  the  Huronian  rocks  of  Lake  Superior.  He  thus  recog- 
nized the  existence  of  at  least  three  vast  systems  older 
than  the  oldest  fossiliferous  formations.  He  may  be  said 
to  have  inaugurated  the  detailed  study  of  Pre-Cambriaii 
rocks.  Subsequent  investigation  has  shown  the  structure 
of  the  regions  which  he  explored  to  be  even  more  compli- 


vi  Rise  of  Glacial  Geology  271 

cated  and  difficult  than  he  believed  it  to  be,  and  various 
modifications  have  been  proposed  in  his  work  and  termin- 
ology. But  he  will  ever  stand  forward  as  one  of  the 
pioneers  of  geology  who  in  the  face  of  incredible  diffi- 
culties first  opened  the  way  towards  a  comprehension  of 
the  oldest  rocks  of  the  crust  of  the  earth. 

If  a  geologist  were  asked  to  point  out  what  departments 
of  his  science  had  made  the  most  signal  progress  during 
the  present  century,  he  would  undoubtedly  place  first  the 
extraordinary  development  of  stratigraphy  and  its  palse- 
ontological  accompaniments.  But  were  he  to  continue 
his  selection,  he  would  probably  point  to  glaciation  and 
petrography  as  the  two  sections  which  display  the  most 
remarkable  advance,  the  former  created  within  the  life- 
time of  many  geologists  still  living,  the  latter,  though  not 
actually  founded,  yet  vivified  with  a  new  life  within  the 
memory  of  most  of  us,  and  by  a  man  whom  we  can  count 
among  our  living  associates. 

The  original  suggestion  of  Playfair  that  the  erratic 
blocks  of  Switzerland  had  been  transported  by  glaciers, 
during  a  former  vast  extension  of  the  ice  of  the  Alps,  had 
passed  out  of  mind.  Venetz  and  Charpentier  were  the  first 
to  take  up  anew  this  interesting  department  of  geology, 
and  to  trace  the  dispersal  of  the  crystalline  rocks  of  the 
Central  Alps  outward  across  the  great  Swiss  plain  to  the 
flanks  of  the  Jura  mountains.1  It  was  reserved,  however, 
for  Agassiz  to  perceive  the  wide  significance  of  the  facts 
observed,  and  to  start  the  investigations  which  culminated 
in  the  recognition  of  an  Ice  Age  that  involved  the  whole 

1  Schweizer.  GeselL  VerhandL  1834,  p.  23 ;  Ann.  des  Mines,  viii.  (1835) 
p.  219  ;  Leonhard  und  Bronn,  Neues  Jahrb.  1837,  p.  472. 


272  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

of  the  northern  part  of  our  hemisphere,  and  in  the  volumin- 
ous literature  which  has  recorded  the  rapid  progress  of 
this  department  of  geology. 

Jean  Louis  Eodolphe  Agassiz  (1807-18*73)  was  born  in 
Switzerland,  and  rose  to  distinction  by  his  scientific  work 
in  Europe,  but  he  went  to  the  United  States  when  he  was 
still  only  forty-two  years  of  age,  and  spent  the  last  twenty- 
seven  years  of  his  life  as  an  energetic  and  successful  leader 
of  science  in  his  adopted  home.  His  fame  is  thus  both 
European  and  American,  and  the  geologists  of  New  England, 
not  less  than  those  of  Switzerland,  may  claim  him  as  one 
of  their  most  distinguished  worthies. 

We  must  pass  over  the  brilliant  researches  into  the  his- 
tory of  fossil  fishes  which  placed  the  name  of  Agassiz  high 
among  the  palaeontologists  of  Europe  when  he  was  still  a 
young  man.  What  we  are  more  particularly  concerned 
with  here  is  the  share  he  had  in  founding  the  modern 
school  of  glacial  geology.  As  far  back  as  the  summer  of 
1837,  when  he  was  only  thirty- three  years  of  age,  Agassiz, 
as  President  of  the  Helvetian  Society  of  Natural  Science, 
struck,  with  the  hand  of  a  master,  the  keynote  of  all  his 
future  research  in  glaciation.  Tracing  the  distribution  of 
the  erratic  blocks  above  the  present  level  of  the  glaciers, 
and  far  beyond  their  existing  limits,  he  connected  these 
transported  masses  with  the  polished  and  striated  rock- 
surfaces  which  were  known  to  extend  even  to  the  summits 
of  the  southern  slopes  of  the  Jura.  He  showed,  from  the 
nature  of  these  smoothed  surfaces,  that  they  could  not 
have  been  worn  into  their  characteristic  forms  by  any 
current  of  water.  The  fine  striae,  engraven  on  them  as 
with  a  diamond-point,  he  proved  to  be  precisely  similar 


VI 


Agassiz  27, 


to  those  now  being  scratched  on  the  rocky  floors  of  the 
modern  glaciers,  and  he  inferred  that  the  polished  and 
striated  rocks  of  the  Jura,  even  though  now  many  leagues 
from  the  nearest  glacier,  must  have  acquired  their  peculiar 
surface  from  the  action  of  ice  moving  over  them,  as  modern 
glaciers  slide  upon  their  beds.  He  was  thus  led  to  con- 
clude that  the  Alpine  ice,  now  restricted  to  the  higher 
valleys,  once  extended  into  the  central  plain,  crossed  it,  and 
even  mounted  to  the  southern  summits  of  the  Jura  chain. 

Before  Agassiz  took  up  the  question,  there  were  two 
prevalent  opinions  regarding  the  transport  of  the  erratics. 
One  of  these  called  in  the  action  of  powerful  floods  of 
water,  the  other  invoked  the  assistance  of  floating  ice. 
Agassiz  combated  these  views  with  great  skill.  His 
reasoning  ought  to  have  convinced  his  contemporaries 
that  his  explanation  was  the  true  one.  But  the  conclu- 
sions to  which  he  was  led  seemed  to  most  men  of  the  day 
extravagant  and  incredible.  Even  a  cautious  thinker  like 
Lyell  saw  less  difficulty  in  sinking  the  whole  of  Central 
Europe  under  the  sea,  and  covering  the  waters  with  floating 
icebergs,  than  in  conceiving  that  the  Swiss  glaciers  were 
once  large  enough  to  reach  to  the  Jura.  Men  shut  their 
eyes  to  the  meaning  of  the  unquestionable  fact  that,  while 
there  was  absolutely  no  evidence  for  a  marine  submergence, 
the  former  track  of  the  glaciers  could  be  followed  mile 
after  mile,  by  the  rocks  they  had  scored  and  the  blocks 
they  had  dropped,  all  the  way  from  their  present  ends  to 
the  far-distant  crests  of  the  Jura. 

Agassiz  felt  that  the  question  was  connected  with  large 
problems  in  geology.  The  former  vast  extension  of  the 
Swiss  glaciers  could  be  no  mere  accidental  or  local  pheno- 

T 


274  The  Founders  of  Geology 

menon,  but  must  have  resulted  from  some  general  lowering 
of  temperature.  He  coupled  with  this  deduction  certain 
theoretical  statements  regarding  former  climates  and  faunas, 
which  have  not  been  supported  by  subsequent  research. 

The  main  conclusions  which  the  Swiss  naturalist  drew, 
so  greatly  interested  him  that  he  spent  part  of  five  suc- 
cessive summers  investigating  the  vestiges  of  the  old 
glaciers,  and  the  operations  of  those  of  the  present  time. 
He  convinced  himself  that  the  great  extension  of  the  ice 
was  connected  with  the  last  great  geological  changes  on 
the  surface  of  the  globe,  and  with  the  extinction  of  the 
large  pachyderms,  wiose  remains  are  so  abundant  in 
Siberia.  He  believed  that  the  glaciers  did  not  advance 
from  the  Alps  into  the  plains,  but  rather  that  ice  once 
covered  all  the  lower  grounds,  and  finally  retreated  into 
the  mountains. 

Having  arrived  at  these  conclusions  from  studies  in  his 
native  country,  Agassiz  was  naturally  desirous  to  see  how 
far  his  views  could  be  tested  or  confirmed  in  a  region  far 
removed  from  any  existing  glaciers.  Accordingly,  in  the 
year  1840,  three  years  after  his  address  at  Neufchatel,  he 
had  an  opportunity  of  visiting  Britain,  and  took  advantage 
of  it  to  examine  a  considerable  part  of  Scotland,  the  north 
of  England,  and  the  north,  centre,  west,  and  south-west  of 
Ireland.  The  results  of  this  investigation  were  of  remark- 
able influence  in  the  progress  of  glacial  geology.  Agassiz 
demonstrated  the  identity  of  the  phenomena  in  Britain 
with  those  in  Switzerland,  and  claimed  "that  not  only 
glaciers  once  existed  in  the  British  Islands,  but  that  large 
sheets  (nappes)  of  ice  covered  all  the  surface." 1 

1  Proc.  Geol.  Soc.  vol.  iii.  (1840),  p.  331. 


vi  Rise  of  Petrography  275 

These  researches  started  the  study  of  ancient  glaciation. 
Buckland,  Lyell,  Darwin,  Chambers  and  others  took  up 
the  question,  and  added  to  the  evidence  adduced  by 
Agassiz  from  his  rapid  traverses.  At  first  the  existence 
of  former  glaciers  in  the  valleys  of  Britain  was  the  con- 
clusion chiefly  sought  to  be  established.  British  geologists, 
and  indeed  geologists  generally,  were  for  many  years 
unwilling  to  admit  that  not  only  the  mountain-valleys, 
but  even  the  lowlands  of  the  northern  hemisphere  were 
at  a  late  geological  period  buried  under  sheets  of  ice. 
They  preferred  to  call  in  the  action  of  floating  ice,  without 
perceiving  that  in  so  doing  they  involved  themselves  in 
far  more  serious  physical  difficulties  than  those  which 
they  sought  to  avoid.  But  for  many  years  past  the 
teaching  of  Agassiz  in  all  its  essential  elements  has  been 
generally  accepted,  and  his  name  is  now  enshrined  in  the 
records  of  our  science  as  that  of  the  true  founder  of 
glacial  geology. 

I  turn  now  to  the  petrographical  department  of 
geological  inquiry,  as  exhibiting  the  last  great  forward 
stride  which  our  science  has  taken.  We  have  seen  how 
greatly  geology  and  mineralogy  were  indebted  to  Werner 
for  his  careful  and  precise  definitions.  The  impulse  which 
he  gave  to  the  study  of  Petrography  continued  to  show  its 
effects  long  after  his  time,  more  particularly  in  Germany. 
Methods  of  examination  were  improved,  chemical  analysis 
was  more  resorted  to,  and  the  rocks  of  the  earth's  crust, 
so  far  as  related  to  their  ultimate  chemical  constitution, 
were  fairly  well  known  and  classified.  Their  internal 
structure,  however,  was  very  imperfectly  understood. 
Where  they  were  coarsely  crystalline,  their  component 


276  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

minerals  might  be  readily  determined  ;  but  where  they 
became  fine-grained,  nothing  more  could  be  said  about  the 
nature  and  association  of  their  constituents  than  might  be 
painfully  deciphered  with  the  help  of  a  hand-lens.  Hence 
though  not  actually  at  a  standstill,  petrography  continued 
to  make  but  slow  progress.  In  some  countries  indeed, 
notably  in  Britain,  it  was  almost  entirely  neglected  in 
favour  of  the  superior  attractions  of  fossils  and  strati- 
graphy. But  at  last  there  came  a  time  of  awakening  and 
rapid  advance. 

In  order  to  trace  the  history  of  this  petrographical 
resuscitation,  I  must  &sk  you  to  accompany  me  to  the 
workshop  of  an  ingenious  and  inventive  mechanician, 
William  Mcol,  who  was  a  lecturer  on  Natural  Philosophy 
at  Edinburgh  in  the  early  part  of  this  century.  Among 
his  inventions  was  the  famous  prism  of  Iceland  spar  that 
bears  his  name.1  Every  petrographer  will  acknowledge 
how  indispensable  this  little  piece  of  apparatus  is  in  his 
microscopic  investigations.  He  may  not  be  aware,  how- 
ever, that  it  was  the  same  skilful  hands  that  devised  the 
process  of  making  thin  slices  of  minerals  and  rocks 
whereby  the  microscopic  examination  of  these  substances 
has  become  possible. 

In  the  course  of  his  experiments,  Nicol  hit  upon  the 
plan  of  cutting  sections  of  fossil  wood,  so  as  to  reveal 
their  minutest  vegetable  structures.  He  took  a  slice  from 
the  specimen  to  be  studied,  ground  it  perfectly  flat,  polished 
it,  and  then  cemented  it  by  means  of  Canada  balsam  to  a 
piece  of  plate-glass.  The  exposed  surface  of  the  slice  was 

1  See  Nicol's  original  account  of  his  prism  in  Edin.  New  Phil.  Journ. 
vol.  vi.  (1829),  p.  83. 


vi  Inventions  of  William  Nicol  277 

then  ground  down,  until  the  piece  of  stone  was  reduced  to 
a  thin  pellicle  adhering  to  the  glass,  and  the  requisite 
degree  of  transparency  was  obtained.  Nicol  himself  pre- 
pared a  large  number  of  slices  of  fossil  and  recent  woods. 
Many  of  these  were  described  by  Henry  Witham  in  his 
Observations  on  Fossil  Vegetables  (1831),  to  which  Nicol 
supplied  the  first  published  account  of  his  process. 

Here  then  geologists  were  provided  with  a  method  of 
investigating  the  minutest  structures  of  rocks  and  minerals. 
It  was  now  possible  to  subject  any  part  of  the  earth's  crust 
to  investigation  with  the  microscope.  It  might  have  been 
thought  that  those  who  devoted  themselves  to  the  study  of 
that  crust,  especially  those  who  were  more  particularly 
interested  in  the  structure,  composition  and  history  of 
rocks,  would  have  hastened  to  avail  themselves  of  the  new 
facilities  for  research  thus  offered  to  them. 

It  must  be  confessed,  I  am  afraid,  that  geologists  are 
about  as  difficult  to  move  as  their  own  erratic  blocks. 
They  took  no  notice  of  the  possibilities  put  in  their  way 
by  William  Mcol.  And  so  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  the 
matter  went  to  sleep.  When  Nicol  died,  his  instruments 
and  preparations  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  late  Mr. 
Alexander  Bryson  of  Edinburgh  who,  having  considerable 
dexterity  as  a  manipulator,  and  being  much  interested  in 
the  process,  made  many  additions  to  the  collections  which 
he  had  acquired.  In  particular,  he  made  numerous  thin 
slices  of  minerals  and  rocks  for  the  purpose  of  exhibiting 
the  cavities  containing  fluid,  which  had  been  described 
long  before  by  Brewster1  and  by  Nicol.2  In  my  boy- 

1  Trans.  Roy.  Soc.  Edin.  vol.  x.  (1824),  p.  1. 

2  Edin.  New.  Phil.  Jour.  vol.  v.  (1828),  p.  94. 


278  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

hood  I  had  frequent  opportunities  of  seeing  these  and 
the  other  specimens  in  Mr.  Bryson's  cabinet,  as  well 
as  the  fine  series  of  fossil  woods  sliced  so  long  before  by 
Nicol. 

At  last  Mr.  Henry  Sorby  came  to  Edinburgh,  and  had 
an  opportunity  of  looking  over  the  Bryson  collection.  He 
was  particularly  struck  with  the  series  of  slices  illustrating 
"  fluid-cavities,"  and  at  once  saw  that  the  subject  was  one 
of  which  the  further  prosecution  could  not  fail  to  "  lead  to 
important  conclusions  in  geological  theory."1  He  soon 
began  to  put  the  method  of  thin  slices  into  practice,  made 
sections  of  mica-schist}2  and  found  so  much  that  was  new 
and  important,  with  a  promise  of  such  a  rich  harvest  of 
results,  that  he  threw  his  whole  energy  into  the  investiga- 
tion for  several  years,  and  produced  at  last  in  1858  the  well- 
known  memoir,  On  the  Microscopical  Structure  of  Crystals? 
which  marks  one  of  the  most  prominent  epochs  of  modern 
geology.  I  have  always  felt  a  peculiar  satisfaction  in  the 
reflection  that  though  the  work  of  William  Nicol  was 
never  adequately  recognized  in  his  lifetime,  nor  for 
many  years  afterwards,  it  was  his  thin  slices,  prepared 
by  his  own  hands,  that  eventually  started  Mr.  Sorby 
on  his  successful  and  distinguished  career,  and  thus 
opened  out  a  new  and  vast  field  for  petrographical  in- 
vestigation. 

It  is  not  necessary  here  to  recapitulate  the  achieve- 
ments which  have  placed  Mr.  Sorby's  name  at  the  head  of 
modern  petrographers.  He,  for  the  first  time,  showed  how, 

1  Quart.  Jour.  Geol.  Soc.  vol.  xiv.  (1858),  p.  454. 

2  Brit.  Assoc.  Reports,  1856,  sections,  p.  78. 

3  Quart.  Journ.  Geol.  Soc.  vol.  xiv.  (1858),  p.  453. 


vi  Mr.  Henry  Clifton  Sorby  279 

by  means  of  the  microscope,  it  was  possible  to  discover 
the  minute  structure  and  composition  of  rocks,  and  to  learn 
much  regarding  their  mode  of  origin.  He  took  us,  as  it 
were,  into  the  depths  of  a  volcanic  focus,  and  revealed  the 
manner  in  which  lavas  acquire  their  characters.  He 
carried  us  still  deeper  into  the  terrestrial  crust,  and  laid 
open  the  secrets  of  those  profound  abysses  in  which  granitic 
rocks  have  been  prepared.  His  methods  were  so  simple, 
and  his  deductions  so  startling,  that  they  did  not  instantly 
carry  conviction  to  the  minds  of  geologists,  more  par- 
ticularly to  those  of  his  own  countrymen.  The  reproach 
that  it  was  impossible  to  look  at  a  mountain  through  a 
microscope  was  brought  forward  in  opposition  to  the  new 
departure  which  he  advocated.  Well  did  he  reply  by 
anticipation  to  this  objection.  "Some  geologists,  only 
accustomed  to  examine  large  masses  in  the  field,  may 
perhaps  be  disposed  to  question  the  value  of  the  facts  I 
have  described,  and  to  think  the  objects  so  minute  as  to 
be  quite  beneath  their  notice,  and  that  all  attempts  at 
accurate  calculations  from  such  small  data  are  quite 
inadmissible.  What  other  science,  however,  has  prospered 
by  adopting  such  a  creed?  What  physiologist  would 
think  of  ignoring  all  the  invaluable  discoveries  that 
have  been  made  in  his  science  with  the  microscope  merely 
because  the  objects  are  minute  ?  .  .  .  With  such  striking 
examples  before  us,  shall  we  physical  geologists  maintain 
that  only  rough  and  imperfect  methods  of  research  are 
applicable  to  our  own  science  ?  Against  such  an  opinion 
I  certainly  must  protest ;  and  I  argue  that  there  is  no 
necessary  connection  between  the  size  of  an  object  and  the 
value  of  a  fact,  and  that,  though  the  objects  I  have 


280  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

described  are  minute,  the  conclusions  to  be  derived  from 
the  facts  are  great." 1 

Professor  Zirkel  was  the  first  geologist  of  note  who 
took  up  with  zeal  the  method  of  investigation  so  auspi- 
ciously inaugurated  by  Mr.  Sorby.  But  some  five  years 
had  elapsed  before  he  made  his  communication  on  the 
subject  to  the  Academy  of  Sciences  of  Vienna.2  From 
that  date  (1863)  he  devoted  himself  with  much  zeal  and 
success  to  the  investigation,  and  produced  a  series  of  papers 
and  volumes  which  gave  a  powerful  impetus  to  the  study 
of  petrography.  This  department  of  geology  was  indeed 
entirely  reconstituted/  The  most  exact  methods  of  optical 
research  were  introduced  into  it  by  Professor  Bosenbusch, 
Professor  Fouque,  M.  Michel  Levy  and  others,  and  the 
study  of  rocks  once  more  competed  with  that  of  fossils  in 
attractiveness.  We  have  only  to  look  at  the  voluminous 
literature  which  has  sprung  up  in  the  last  thirty  years 
devoted  to  the  investigation  of  rocks,  to  see  how  great  a 
revolution  has  been  effected  by  the  introduction  of  the 
microscope  into  the  equipment  of  the  geologist.  For  this 
transformation  we  are,  in  the  first  instance,  indebted  to 
William  Mcol  and  Henry  Clifton  Sorby. 

In  bringing  to  a  close  my  outline  of  the  work  of  those 
who  deserve  to  be  remembered  as  the  founders  of  geology,  I 

1  Quart.  Journ.  Geol.  Soc.  xiv.  (1858),  p.  497.     See  also  Mr.  Sorby's 
Presidential  Addresses  to  the  Geological  Society  for  1879  and  1880. 

2  Sitzungsber  Math.  Naturwiss.  vol.  xlvii.  1st  part  (1863),  p.  226.     In 
this  paper  the  author  refers  to  previous  occasional  use  of  the  microscope 
for  determining  the  mineralogical  composition  of  rocks  by  Gustav  Rose, 
G.  vom  Rath,  G.  Jenzsch,  M.  Deiters  and  others.     In  England  the  first 
geologist  who  published  the  results  of  his  microscopical  examination  of 
rocks  was  David  Forbes,  Popular  Science  Review  (October  1867),  vol.  vi. 
p.  355. 


VI 


Lyell  281 


arn  conscious  that  many  names  which  I  have  omitted  might 
fitly  have  found  a  place  in  my  list.  But  there  are  still 
two  which  I  must  not  pass  over,  and  with  these  I  shall 
conclude.  They  are  Charles  Lyell  and  Charles  Darwin — 
two  illustrious  men  who  were  linked  together  in  their  lives 
by  many  ties  of  sympathy,  and  whom  it  is  a  gratification 
to  place  side  by  side  on  the  bede-roll  of  geological  fame. 

Charles  Lyell  (1797-1875)  exercised  a  profound  influ- 
ence on  the  geology  of  his  time  in  all  English-speaking 
countries.  Adopting  the  principles  of  the  Huttonian 
theory,  he  developed  them  until  the  original  enunciator 
of  them  was  nearly  lost  sight  of.  Lyell,  with  unwearied 
industry,  marshalled  in  admirable  order  all  the  observa- 
tions that  he  could  collect  in  support  of  the  doctrine  that 
the  present  is  the  key  to  the  past.  With  inimitable 
lucidity,  he  traced  the  operation  of  existing  causes,  and 
held  them  up  as  the  measure  of  those  which  have  acted 
in  bygone  time.  He  carried  Hutton's  doctrine  to  its 
logical  conclusion,  for  not  only  did  he  refuse  to  allow  the 
introduction  of  any  process  which  could  not  be  shown  to 
be  a  part  of  the  present  system  of  nature,  he  would  not 
even  admit  that  there  was  any  reason  to  suppose  the 
degree  of  activity  of  the  geological  agents  to  have  «ever 
seriously  differed  from  what  it  has  been  within  human 
experience.  He  became  the  great  high  priest  of  Uni- 
formitarianism  —  a  creed  which  grew  to  be  almost  uni- 
versal in  England  during  his  life,  but  which  never  made 
much  way  in  the  rest  of  Europe,  and  which  in  its  extreme 
form  is  probably  now  held  by  few  geologists  in  any  country. 
Lyell's  Principles  of  Geology  will,  however,  always  rank  as 
one  of  the  classics  of  geology,  and  must  form  an  early  part 


282  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

of  the  reading  of  every  man  who  would  wish  to  make 
himself  an  accomplished  geologist. 

LyelTs  work  was  mainly  that  of  a  critic  and  exponent  of 
the  researches  of  his  contemporaries;  and  of  a  philosophical 
writer  thereon,  with  a  rare  faculty  of  perceiving  the  con- 
nection of  scattered  facts  with  each  other,  and  with  the 
general  principles  of  science.  As  Eamsay  once  remarked 
to  me,  "  We  collect  the  data,  and  Lyell  teaches  us  to  com- 
prehend the  meaning  of  them."  But  Lyell,  though  he  did 
not,  like  Sedgwick  and  Murchison,  add  new  chapters  to 
geological  history,  nevertheless  left  his  mark  upon  the 
nomenclature  and  classification  of  the  geological  record. 
Conceiving,  as  far  back  as  1828,  the  idea  of  arranging  the 
whole  series  of  Tertiary  formations  in  four  groups,  accord- 
ing to  their  affinity  to  the  living  fauna,  he  established, 
in  conjunction  with  Deshayes,  who  had  independently 
formed  a  similar  opinion,  the  well-known  classification 
into  Eocene,  Miocene,  and  Pliocene.  The  first  of  these  terms, 
as  we  all  know,  was  proposed  for  strata  containing  an 
extremely  small  proportion  of  living  species  of  shells ;  the 
second  for  those  where  the  percentage  of  recent  species 
was  considerable,  but  still  formed  the  minority  of  the 
whole  assemblage,  while  the  third  embraced  the  formations 
in  which  living  forms  were  predominant.  The  scheme 
was  a  somewhat  artificial  one,  and  the  original  percent- 
ages have  had  to  be  modified  from  time  to  time,  but  the 
terms  have  kept  their  place,  and  are  now  firmly  planted  in 
the  geological  language  of  all  corners  of  the  globe. 

Charles  Darwin  (1809-1882)  contributed  many  valuable 
works  to  the  literature  of  geology.  But  it  is  not  for  these 
that  I  cite  his  name  on  the  present  occasion.  His  two 


VI 


Darwin  283 


geological  chapters  in  the  Origin  of  Species  produced  the 
greatest  revolution  in  geological  thought  which  has  occurred 
in  my  time.  Younger  students,  who  are  familiar  with  the 
ideas  there  promulgated,  can  hardly  realize  the  effect  of 
them  on  an  older  generation.  They  seem  now  so  obvious 
and  so  well-established,  that  it  may  be  difficult  to  conceive 
a  philosophical  science  without  them. 

To  most  of  the  geologists  of  his  day,  Darwin's  conten- 
tion for  the  imperfection  of  the  geological  record,  and  his 
demonstration  of  it,  came  as  a  kind  of  surprise  and 
awakening.  They  had  never  realized  that  the  record  was 
so  fragmentary.  And  yet  when  Darwin  pointed  this  out 
to  them  they  were  compelled,  sometimes  rather  reluctantly, 
to  admit  that  he  was  right.  Some  of  them  at  once  adopted 
the  idea,  as  Eamsay  did,  and  carried  it  much  further.1 

Until  Darwin  took  up  the  question,  the  necessity  for 
vast  periods  of  time,  in  order  to  explain  the  characters  of 
the  geological  record,  was  very  inadequately  realized.  Of 
course,  in  a  general  sense,  the  great  antiquity  of  the  crust 
of  the  earth  was  everywhere  admitted.  But  no  one  before 
his  day  had  perceived  how  enormous  must  have  been  the 
periods  required  for  the  deposition  of  even  some  thin  con- 
tinuous groups  of  strata.  He  supplied  a  criterion  by 
which,  to  some  degree,  the  relative  duration  of  formations 
might  perhaps  be  apportioned.  When  he  declared  that 
the  intervals  that  elapsed  between  consecutive  formations 
may  sometimes  have  been  of  far  longer  duration  than  the 
formations  themselves,  contemporary  geologists  could  only 
smile  incredulously  in  their  bewilderment,  but  in  a  few 

1  See  his  two  Presidential  Addresses  to  the  Geological  Society,  Quart. 
Journ.  Geol.  Soc.  vols.  xix.  (1863),  xx.  (1864). 


284  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

years  B-amsay  showed  by  a  detailed  examination  of  the 
distribution  of  fossils  in  the  sedimentary  strata  that 
Darwin's  suggestion  must  be  accepted  as  an  axiom  in  geo- 
logical theory.  Again,  the  great  naturalist  surmised  that, 
before  the  deposition  of  the  oldest  known  fossiliferous 
strata,  there  may^  have  been  antecedent  periods,  collectively 
far  longer  than  from  the  date  of  these  strata  up  to  the 
present  day,  and  that,  during  these  vast,  yet  quite  unknown, 
periods,  the  world  may  have  swarmed  with  living  crea- 
tures. But  his  contemporaries  could  only  shrug  their 
shoulders  anew,  and  wonder  at  the  extravagant  notions  of 
a  biologist.  But  who  nowadays  is  unwilling  to  grant  the 
possibility,  nay  probability,  of  Darwin's  surmise  ?  Who 
can  look  upon  the  earliest  Cambrian  fauna  without  the 
strongest  conviction  that  life  must  have  existed  on  this 
earth  for  countless  ages  before  that  comparatively  well- 
developed  fauna  came  into  existence  ?  For  this  expansion 
of  our  geological  vision,  and  for  the  flood  of  light  which 
has  been  thrown  upon  geological  history  by  the  theory 
of  evolution,  we  stand  indebted  to  Charles  Darwin. 

In  the  account  which  I  have  now  placed  before  you  of  the 
work  of  some  of  the  more  notable  men  who  have  created 
the  science  of  geology,  one  or  two  leading  facts  stand  out 
prominently  before  us.  In  the  first  place,  even  in  the  re- 
stricted list  of  names  which  we  have  considered,  it  is 
remarkable  how  varied  have  been  the  employments  of 
these  men,  and  how  comparatively  few  of  them  could  be 
called  professional  geologists.  The  majority  of  them  have 
been  men  engaged  in  other  pursuits,  who  have  devoted 
their  leisure  to  the  cultivation  of  science.  Guettard, 


VI 


Conclusion  285 


Pallas,  and  Fuchsel  were  physicians,  led  by  their  medical 
training  to  interest  themselves  in  natural  history.  Giraud- 
Soulavie  and  Michell  were  clergymen.  Murchison  was  a 
retired  soldier.  Alexander  Brongniart  was  at  first  engaged 
in  superintending  the  porcelain  manufactory  of  Sevres. 
Desmarest  was  a  hard-worked  civil  servant  who  snatched 
his  intervals  for  geology  from  the  toils  of  incessant  official 
occupation.  William  Smith  found  time  for  his  researches 
in  the  midst  of  all  the  cares  and  anxieties  of  his  profession 
as  an  engineer  and  surveyor.  Hutton,  Hall,  De  Saussure, 
Von  Buch,  Lyell  and  Darwin  were  men  of  means,  who 
scorned  a  life  of  slothful  ease  and  dedicated  themselves 
and  their  fortune  to  the  study  of  the  history  of  the  earth. 
Playfair  and  Cuvier  were  both  teachers  of  other  branches 
of  science,  irresistibly  drawn  into  the  sphere  of  geological 
inquiry  and  speculation.  Of  the  whole  gallery  of  worthies 
that  have  passed  before  us  there  are  only  three  that  can 
strictly  be  considered  as  professional  geologists — Werner,! 
Sedgwick  and  Logan.  Were  we  to  step  outside  of  that 
gallery,  and  select  as  many  names  of  hardly  inferior  lustre, 
we  should  find  the  proportions  not  to  be  seriously  different. 
From  the  beginning  of  its  career,  geology  has  owed  its 
foundation  and  its  advance  to  no  select  and  privileged 
class  of  experts.  It  has  been  open  to  all  who  cared  to 
undergo  the  trial  which  its  successful  prosecution  demands. 
And  what  it  has  been  in  the  past,  it  remains  to-day.  No 
branch  of  natural  knowledge  lies  more  invitingly  open  to 
every  student  who,  loving  the  fresh  face  of  Nature,  is 
willing  to  train  his  faculty  of  observation  in  the  field,  and 
to  discipline  his  mind  by  the  patient  correlation  of  facts 
and  the  fearless  dissection  of  theories.  To  such  an  inquirer 


LECT. 


286  The  Founders  of  Geology 

no  limit  can  be  set.  He  may  be  enabled  to  rebuild  parts 
of  the  temple  of  science,  or  to  add  new  towers  and  pinnacles 
to  its  superstructure.  But  even  if  he  should  never  venture 
into  such  ambitious  undertakings,  he  will  gain,  in  the 
cultivation  of  geological  pursuits,  a  solace  and  enjoyment 
amid  the  cares  of  life,  which  will  become  to  him  a  source 
of  the  purest  joy. 

In  the  second  place,  the  history  of  our  science  presents 
some  conspicuous  examples  of  the  length  of  time  that 
may  elapse  before  a  fecund  idea  comes  to  germinate  and 
bear  fruit.  Consider  for  a  moment  how  many  years 
passed  before  the  stratigraphical  conceptions  of  Fuchsel  and 
Giraud-Soulavie  took  more  definite  shape  in  the  detailed 
investigations  of  Cuvier,  Brongniart  and  Smith,  and  how 
many  more  years  were  needed  before  the  Secondary  and 
Tertiary  formations  were  definitely  arranged  and  sub- 
divided. Eemember  too  that  even  after  the  principles  of 
stratigraphy  had  been  settled,  a  quarter  of  a  century  had 
slipped  away  before  they  were  successfully  applied  to  the 
Transition  rocks.  Mark  the  history  of  physiographical 
geology,  and  note  that  though  the  principles  of  this  branch 
of  science  were  firmly  grasped  by  Desmarest  and  Hutton 
in  last  century,  their  work  was  neglected  and  forgotten 
until  the  whole  subject  has  been  revived  and  marvellously 
extended  in  our  own  day.  Again  let  me  recall  how 
slowly  the  key  that  unlocks  the  innermost  mysteries  of 
rock-structure  was  made  use  of.  Five-and-twenty  years 
elapsed  after  William  Mcol  had  shown  how  stony  sub- 
stances could  be  investigated  by  means  of  the  microscope, 
before  Mr.  Sorby  called  the  attention  of  geologists  to  the 
enormous  value  of  the  method  thus  put  into  their  hands. 


VI 


Conclusion  287 


Other  five  years  had  to  pass  before  the  method  began  to 
be  taken  up  in  Germany,  and  a  still  longer  time  before  it 
came  into  general  use  all  over  the  world. 

Such  instances  as  these  lead  to  two  reflections.  On 
the  one  hand,  they  assure  us  of  the  permanent  vitality 
of  truth.  The  seed  may  be  long  in  showing  signs  of 
life,  but  these  signs  come  at  last.  On  the  other  hand, 
we  are  warned  to  be  on  the  outlook  for  unrecognized 
meanings  and  applications  in  the  work  of  our  own  day 
and  in  that  of  older  date.  We  are  taught  the  necessity 
not  only  of  keeping  ourselves  abreast  of  the  progress  of 
science  at  the  present  time,  but  also  of  making  ourselves 
acquainted  as  far  as  we  possibly  can  with  the  labours  of 
our  predecessors.  It  is  not  enough  to  toil  in  our  little 
corner  of  the  field.  We  must  keep  ourselves  in  touch 
with  what  is  going  on  now,  and  what  has  been  done 
during  the  past  in  that  and  surrounding  parts  of  the 
domain  of  science.  Many  a  time  we  may  find  that  the 
results  obtained  by  some  fellow-labourer,  though  they  may 
have  had  but  little  significance  for  him,  flash  a  flood  of 
light  on  what  we  have  been  doing  ourselves. 

I  am  only  too  painfully  aware  how  increasingly  difficult 
it  is  to  keep  pace  with  the  ever- rising  tide  of  geological 
literature.  The  science  itself  has  so  widened,  and  the 
avenues  to  publication  have  so  prodigiously  multiplied, 
that  one  is  almost  driven  in  despair  to  become  a  specialist, 
and  confine  one's  reading  to  that  portion  of  the  literature 
which  deals  with  one's  own  more  particular  branch  of  the 
science.  But  this  narrowing  of  our  range  has  a  markedly 
prejudicial  effect  on  the  character  of  our  work.  The  only 
consolation  we  can  find  is  the  conviction,  borne  in  upon 


288  The  Founders  of  Geology  LECT. 

us  by  ample  and  painful  experience,  that  a  very  large 
mass  of  the  geological  writing  of  the  present  time  is  utterly 
worthless  for  any  of  the  higher  purposes  of  the  science, 
and  that  it  may  quite  safely  and  profitably,  both  as  regards 
time  and  temper,  be  left  unread.  If  geologists,  and 
especially  young  geologists,  could  only  be  brought  to 
realize  that  the  addition  of  another  paper  to  the  swollen 
flood  of  our  scientific  literature  involves  a  serious  respon- 
sibility ;  that  no  man  should  publish  what  is  not  of  real 
consequence,  and  that  his  statements  when  published 
should  be  as  clear  and  condensed  as  he  can  make  them, 
what  a  blessed  change  would  come  over  the  faces  of  their 
readers,  and  how  greatly  would  they  conduce  to  the  real 
advance  of  the  science  which  they  wish  to  serve. 

In  the  third  and  last  place,  it  seems  to  me  that  one 
important  lesson  to  be  learnt  from  a  review  of  the  early 
history  of  geology  is  the  absolute  necessity  of  avoiding 
dogmatism.  Let  us  remember  how  often  geological  theory 
has  altered.  The  Catastrophists  had  it  all  their  own  way 
until  the  Uniformitarians  got  the  upper  hand,  only  to  be  in 
turn  displaced  by  the  Evolutionists.  The  Wernerians  were 
as  certain  of  the  origin  and  sequence  of  rocks  as  if  they 
had  been  present  at  the  formation  of  the  earth's  crust. 
Yet  in  a  few  years  their  notions  and  overweening  con- 
fidence became  a  laughing-stock.  From  the  very  nature 
of  its  subject,  as  I  have  already  remarked,  geology  does 
not  generally  admit  of  the  mathematical  demonstration  of 
its  conclusions.  They  rest  upon  a  balance  of  probabilities. 
But  this  balance  is  liable  to  alteration,  as  facts  accumulate 
or  are  better  understood.  Hence  what  seems  to  be  a  well- 
established  deduction  in  one  age  may  be  seen  to  be 


VI 


Conclusion  289 


entirely  erroneous  in  the  next.  Every  year,  however,  the 
data  on  which  these  inferences  are  based  are  more 
thoroughly  comprehended  and  more  rigidly  tested.  Geo- 
logy now  possesses  a  large  and  ever-growing  body  of  well- 
attested  fact  which  will  be  destroyed  by  no  discovery  of 
the  future,  though  it  will  doubtless  be  vastly  augmented, 
while  new  light  may  be  cast  on  many  parts  of  it  now 
supposed  to  be  thoroughly  known. 

Each  of  us  has  it  in  his  power  to  add  to  this  accumula- 
tion of  knowledge.  Careful  and  accurate  observation  is 
always  welcome,  and  may  eventually  prove  of  signal 
importance.  We  must  be  on  our  guard,  however,  against 
premature  speculation  and  theory.  Let  us  do  our  utmost 
to  eliminate  hypothesis  from  our  gathering  of  facts,  or  at 
least  clearly  to  distinguish  between  what  is  fact  and  what 
may  be  our  own  gloss  or  interpretation  of  it.  And,  above 
all,  let  us  preserve  the  modesty  of  the  true  student,  face  to 
face  with  the  mysteries  of  nature.  Proving  all  things  and 
holding  fast  that  which  we  believe  to  be  true,  let  us  look 
back  with  gratitude  and  pride  to  what  has  been  achieved 
by  our  forerunners  in  the  race,  and  while  we  labour  to 
emulate  their  devotion,  let  us  hold  high  the  torch  of 
science,  and  pass  it  on  bright  and  burning  to  those  who 
shall  receive  it  from  our  hands. 


INDEX 


ACADEMY  of  Sciences,  Paris,  17,  18, 

22,  39,  44,  60,  77 
Agassiz,  L.,  researches  of,  in  glacia- 

tion,  271;  discovers  traces  of  former 

glaciers  in  Britain,  274 
Agricola,  52,  53,  120 
Alluvial  series  of  Werner,  114 
Alps,  85 
America,  North,  Pre-Cambrian  rocks 

of,  269 

Amygdaloids,  Button's  view  of,  174 
Angers,  trilobites  of,   recognized  by 

Guettard,  24 

Antrim,  basalt  of,  53,  54,  58,  194 
Anville,  Duchesse  d',  76 
Archiac,  A.  d',  15,  23,  207 
Aubuisson,  J.  F.  d',  cited,  118,  130, 

137,  193,    268 ;    his    birth    and 
education,  138  ;   his  work  on  the 
basalts    of    Saxony,    138 ;    visits 
Auvergne  and  recants  the  Werner  - 
ian  doctrine  of  basalt,  139 

Auvergne, volcanoes  of,  first  discovered  j 
by  Guettard,  34  ;  visited  by  Des- 
marest,  52,  56,  60,  63,  66  ;  Desma- 
rest's  map  of,  59,  65,  74  ;  visited 
by  D' Aubuisson,  139  ;  visited  by 
L.  von  Buch,  142  ;  described  by 
Dolomieu,  198 

BANKS,  Sir  Joseph,  55,  221 

Barrande,  J.,  262 

Basalt,  controversy  regarding  the 
origin  of,  42,  43,  48,  52,  55,  56, 
57,  61,  62,  78,  91,  103,  120-126, 

138,  142-146,  193,  198,  202,  207 
—  supposed  fossiliferous  nature  of, 

194 

Berne,  basalt  war  at,  122 
Bertrand's  views  on  fossils,  27 


Bigsby,  Dr.  J.  J.,  269 

Black,  Dr.  Joseph,  154,  158,  183 

Blode,  K.  A.,  104 

Boate's  Ireland's  Naturall  Historic, 
cited,  20 

Bohemia,  basalt  of,  65,  121  ;  Bar- 
rande's  researches  in,  262 

Bory  de  St.  Vincent,  J.  B.  G.  M., 
74 

Bdttiger,  C.  A.,  108 

Boue,  A.,  143,  197,  256 

Breislak,  S.,  78,  188,  199 

Brewster,  D.,  277 

Brongniart,  A.,  213,  285,  286 

Bryson,  A.,  277 

Buch,  L.  von,  137,  193,  285  ;  birth 
and  education,  141  ;  his  Wernerian 
views  on  basalt,  142 ;  visit  to 
Auvergne  and  conversion  to  a 
belief  in  the  volcanic  origin  of  the 
basalt  there,  142  ;  travels  in  Nor- 
way, 146  ;  on  the  mountain-system 
of  Germany,  147  ;  number  and 
character  of  his  writings,  148  ;  per- 
sonal traits  of,  148  ;  death,  149 

Buckland,  W.,  248,  251,  275 

Buffon,  8,  47,  49 

Burnet,  cosmogony  of,  9 

CALCAIRE  Grossier,  216 

Calcite,  cited  as  a  proof  of  the  igneous 

origin  of  ainygdaloids,  174  ;  fusible 

under  pressure,  190 
Cambrian,    adoption    of    the    term, 

260 

Canada,  pre-Cambrian  rocks  of,  269 
Cantal,  60 

Cassel,  basalt  of,  53,  62 
Catastrophists,  288 
Catherine  II.  of  Russia,  79 


292 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


Chambers,  R.,  275 

Charpentier,  J.  de,  271 

—  J.   F.   W.,   publishes  an  early 
geological  map  in  colours,  22 

Chaulnes,  Due  de,  49 

Childrey's  Britannia  Baconica,  cited, 
20 

Clerk,  John,  of  Eldin,  155,  158,  183 

Clermont-Ferrand,  37,  56 

Columnar  structure  of  basalt,  55,  56, 
61 

Condorcet,  cited,  12,  17,  44 

Conybeare,  W.,  16 

Cook,  Captain  J.,  76,  79 

Cosmogonists,  7,  167 

Coupe,  J.  M.,  211 

Cretaceous  rocks,  classification  of, 
221 

Crystallite,  a  name  given  by  Hall  to 
the  product  resulting  from  the  slow 
cooling  of  artificially  fused  whin- 
stone,  187 

Cuvier,  cited,  15,  48,  49,  75,  76,  85, 
104,  107,  134, 137, 175,  285,  286  ; 
birth  and  education,  211  ;  devotes 
himself  to  science,  211  ;  early 
palaeontological  discoveries,  212  ; 
enters  the  field  of  geology,  212, 213  ; 
perpetual  Secretary  of  the  Institute 
of  France,  220  ;  his  Wernerianism, 
175,  220 

D'ALEMBERT,  15,  50,  73 

Darwin,  C.,  275,  282;  influence  of 
his  Origin  of  Species  on  modern 
geology,  283 

Daubeny,  C.,  16 

Defrance,  J.  L.  M.,  215 

Deiters,  M.,  280 

De  la  Beche,  H.,  247,  264 

DeLuc,  J.  A.,  88,  165,  195 

Descartes,  7 

Desmarest,  cited,  15,  39,  41,  56,  193, 
208,  209,  285,  282;  birth  and 
education  of,  48 ;  first  scientific 
essay  of,  49;  employed  by  the  State 
in  industrial  missions,  51  ;  becomes 
Inspector-General  of  the  Manufac- 
tures of  France,  51 ;  visits  Auvergne, 
52  ;  his  views  on  basalt,  57,  58,  61, 
91,  121 ;  on  volcanic  action,  62 ; 
on  the  origin  of  valleys,  64  ;  on 
volcanic  history,  67,  96  ;  his 
Geographic  Physique,  73,  78 ; 


personal  traits  of,  76  ;  his  death, 
77  ;  his  opinion  of  Hutton,  164 

Devonian  system,  first  establishment 
of,  263,  266 

Diderot,  15,  73 

Doin,  M.,  74 

Dolomieu,  D.  de,  78,  187,  198 

Dufrenoy,  P.  A.,  255 

Dykes,  174,  187 

EARTHQUAKES,  Fuchsel  on  influence 
of,  100 

Eaton,  A.,  269 

Edinburgh,  intellectual  society  of,  in 
the  second  half  of  last  century, 
154  ;  favourable  geological  position 
of,  157,  194  ;  foundation  of  Royal 
Society  of,  158  ;  a  school  of  geology 
established  at,  191  ;  the  Wer- 
nerian  Society  established  at,  193 

Edinburgh  Review,  116,  131,  132, 
194 

Elephant,  fossil,  81,  212 

Elie  de  Beaumont,  L.,  255 

Encycloptdie  of  Diderot  and  D'Alem- 
bert,  15,  73 

England,  early  mineralogical  mapping 
of,  by  Guettard,  20 

and  France  once  united,  50 

rise  of  stratigraphical  geology 

in,  204,  222 

Erzgebirge,  97 

Escher  von  der  Linth,  A.,  92 

Etna,  lavas  of,  compared   with   the 

whinstones  of  Scotland,  187 
Evolutionists,  288 

FAREY,  J.,  237 

Faujas  de  St.  Fond,  B.,  78,  193,  198 

Favre,  A.,  92 

Featherstonhaugh,  G.  W.,  256 

Ferguson,  Adam,  155 

Ferry,  M.,  74 

Fingal's  Cave,  55 

Fitton,  W.  H.,  132,  194,  236,  239 

Fleming,  John,  196 

Flotz-gebirge,  term  proposed  by  Leh- 

mann,   97 ;    adopted    by  Werner, 

114,    121,    125,    129,   130,    245  ; 

disuse  of  the  term,  244 
Foley,  S.,  54 
Forbes,  D.,  280 
Formations,  geological,  first  recognized 

by  Fuchsel,  100 ;  arranged  by  Wer- 


Index 


293 


ner,  112 ;  universal,  of  Werner, 
113 ;  recognized  by  Cuvier  and 
Brongniart,  218 

Fortis,  Abbe,  on  basalt,  78 

Fossil,  use  of  the  term,  [240 

Fossils,  popular  misconceptions  of, 
26,  27 ;  possible  use  of  in  fixing 
age  of  rocks,  suggested  by  De 
Saussure,  90  ;  Fuchsel  on,  101  ;  as 
chronological  monuments,  203,  217, 
219,  228,  238  ;  recognition  of  the 
true  geological  value,  240,  253 

Fouque,  F.,  280 

France,  old  volcanoes  of,  34,  48,  52, 
56,  60,  63,  66,  74,  137,  139,  142, 
145,  198,  204,  249 

and   England  once   connected, 

50 

Secondary  and  Tertiary  forma- 
tions of,  in  the  history  of  strati- 
graphical  geology,  204,  208 ;  Palseo- 
zoic  rocks  of,  255 

Freiberg,   Mining  Academy  of,   105, 

106 

Freiesleben,  J.  C.,  137 
Freshwater    strata,    recognition    of, 

209,  218 
Fuchsel,  G.  C.,  98,  128,  131,  203, 

285,  286 
Fusion,    De    Saussure's    experiments 

in,  91 ;  Hall's  researches  in,  186, 

187 

GENERELLI,  5,  34 

Geognosy,  term  used  by  Werner,  111 

Geological  maps,  earliest,  18,  65 

succession,  development  of  ideas 

regarding,  83,  94,  131,  146,  201, 
204,  208,  211,  221,  222,  226 

Survey  of  Great  Britain,  232, 

261 

nomenclature,  origin  of,  243 

Geology,  historical  method  in,  2 

palasontological,  26 

physiographical,  28,  64,  286 

-  volcanic,  34,  41,  62,  123,  172, 
187 

first  adoption  of  the  term  Geo- 
logy, 88 

first  beginnings  of  experimental, 

92 

—  rise  of  stratigraphical,  201 
chronology   of,  determined   by 


organic  remains,  203,  219 


Geology,  influence  of  fossils  on  the 
progress  of,  240 

lies  open  to  every  one,  285 

increasing  literature  of,  287 

Giant's  Causeway,  53,  54 

Giraud  -  Soulavie,  1'Abbe,  204,  285, 
286 

Glaciation,  rise  and  progress  of  the 
study  of,  271 

Glaciers,  Playfair's  opinion  regard- 
ing, 181 

Glass,  Hall's  experiments  on,  186 

Granite,  natural  fusion  of,  61  ;  ex- 
periments in  the  fusion  of,  91  ; 
supposed  primitive  origin  of,  114, 
129,  201 

intercalated  among  fossiliferous 

strata,  146 

intrusive  character  of,  146, 159, 

175 

Greenough,  G.  B.,  235 

Greywacke,  245,  249 

Guettard,  J.  E.,  his  birth,  12  ;  early 
devotion  to  botany,  14 ;  first  miner- 
alogical  observations,  14 ;  makes 
the  earliest  geological  maps,  18  ; 
his  palseontological  work,  24  ;  his 
contributions  to  physiographical 
geology,  28  ;  on  the  action  of  the 
sea,  31  ;  on  the  old  volcanoes  of 
Auvergne,  34,  47,  63  ;  on  volcanic 
action,  41  ;  on  the  origin  of  basalt, 
42,  55,  122 ;  personal  traits  of, 
43  ;  his  position  in  science,  45,  96, 
284 

HAIDINGER,  W.  von,  148 

Hall,  Sir  James,  181,  193,  194,  285  ; 
his  scientific  career,  184  ;  founds 
experimental  geology,  186 ;  im- 
portant observation  of  dykes,  187  ; 
experiments  on  the  effects  of  pres- 
sure, 189  ;  experiments  in  illus- 
tration of  the  curvature  of  rocks, 
191 

Harz,  97 

Hauer,  Hitter  von,  149 

Haiiy,  E.  J.,  138,  221 

Hermann,  B.  F.  J.  von,  137 

Historical  method,  1 

Hoffmann's  Geschichte  der  Geognosie 
122 

Hooke,  K.,  5 

Hope,  Dr.  T.  C.,  194 


U2 


294 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


Homes,  M.,  149 

Humboldt,  A.  von,  137,  141,  142 

Hunt,  T.  Sterry,  270 

Huot,  J.  J.  N.,  74 

Huronian,  origin  of  term,  270 

Button,  James,  cited,  65,  93,  186, 
187,  189,  190,  193,  285,  286; 
birth  and  education,  150  ;  takes 
the  degree  of  M.D.,  152;  be- 
comes a  farmer,  152  ;  devotes  him- 
self to  a  scientific  life,  1 54 ;  first  pub- 
lication of  his  Theory  of  the  Earth, 
158,  163  ;  views  on  granite,  159  ; 
personal  traits,  162  ;  death,  163  ; 
criticised  by  Desmarest,  164  ;  his 
doctrines,  167  ;  proclaims  that  the 
past  must  be  interpreted  by  the 
present,  167  ;  on  the  origin  of 
stratified  rocks,  168  ;  on  the  con- 
solidation of  sediments,  169  ;  on 
the  influence  of  compression,  170  ; 
on  disturbance  of  the  earth's  crust, 
170  ;  on  the  earth's  internal  tem- 
perature, 172 ;  on  unstratified 
rocks,  173  ;  on  dykes  and  vol- 
canoes, 176  ;  on  veins,  176  ;  fore- 
shadows Lyell's  doctrine  of  meta- 
morphism,  178  ;  on  the  degradation 
of  the  land,  179,  202  ;  insists  that 
every  principle  adopted  must  be 
based  on  observation,  182  ;  repug- 
nance to  experiment  in  geological 
inquiry,  185  ;  views  regarding 
geological  succession,  202 

ITALY,  volcanic  geology  of,  60,  142, 
187,  198,  199 

JAMESON,  K.,  cited,  111,  113,  117, 
118,  124,  125,  126,  132,  245  ; 
Professor  in  the  University  of 
Edinburgh,  192  ;  founds  the  Wer- 
nerian  Society,  193 

Jenzsch,  G.,  280 

Jukes,  J.  B.,  181 

Jussieu,  the  brothers,  13 

KAESTEN,  D.  L.  G.,  137 
Keferstein,  C.,  101,  121,  244 
Kennedy,  K.,  189 
Kirwan,  K.,  165,  195 

LAMANON,  P.,  209,  218 


Laurentian,  origin  of  term,  270 

Lava,  Hall's  experiments  on  the 
fusion  of,  189 

Lavoisier,  early  mineralogical  surveys 
by,  23  ;  his  stratigraphical  work 
in  the  Paris  basin,  210 

Lecoq's  .Epoques  Gfologiques  de 
I'Auvergne,  16 

Lehmann,  J.  G.,  96,  128,  131,  203 

Leibnitz,  cosmogony  of,  7,  118 

Lhuyd  on  trilobites,  25 

Linnaeus,  91 

Lister,  M.,  5,  19 

Logan,  W.  E.,  269,  285 

Lonsdale,  W.,  265 

Lyell,  Charles,  cited,  5,  16,  65,  181, 
246,  273,  285  ;  his  influence  on 
the  progress  of  geology,  281  ;  his 
Principles,  281  ;  his  classification 
of  the  Tertiary  formations,  282 

MACLURE,  W.,  269 

Malesherbes,  35,  51 

Maps,  earliest  geological,  18-23,  65  ; 
Smith's,  of  England,  233  ;  Green- 
ough's,  of  England,  235 

Merian,  P.,  92 

Metamorphism,  doctrine  of,  first  in- 
dicated by  Hutton,  178 

Michel  Levy,  M.  A.,  280 

Michell,  J.,  222,  285 

Microscope,  application  of,  in  petro- 
graphy, 276-280 

Mineralogy,  Werner's  influence  on, 
106,  110 

Molyneux,  T.,  54 

Monnet  and  Guettard's  early  minera- 
logical maps,  23 

Mont  Core,  volcanic  geology  of,  38, 
58 

Montlosier,  F.  D.  E.  de,  65,  78, 
143 

Moro,  L.,  5,  34,  120 

Mountains,  Pallas  on  formation  of, 
82  ;  rise  of  the  appreciation  of, 
84  ;  Lehmann  on,  97  ;  Werner  on, 
115  ;  von  Buch  on,  147 ;  Michell 
on,  223 

Murchison,  R.  I.,  25,  65,  285  ;  birth 
and  education,  247 ;  begins  his 
geological  career,  248 ;  lays  the 
foundation  of  his  Silurian  System, 
251 ;  disagreement  with  Sedgwick, 
261  ;  becomes  Director-General  of 


Index 


295 


the  Geological  Survey,  267  ;  per- 
sonal traits,  267 
Murray,  A.,  270 

NEPTUNISTS,  117,  201 

Nicol,  W.,   his  prism,  276  ;  invents 

the  process  of  cutting  thin  slices 

of  rocks  for  microscopic  examina- 

tion, 276,  286 
Nomenclature,   origin  of  geological, 

243 
Norway,  von  Buch's  travels  in,  146 

OCEAN,    Werner's    doctrine    of    an 

original  universal,  114,  116,  117 
Omalius  d'Halloy,  J.  J.  d',  221 


.  early  beginnings  of, 
4-28,  220  ;  rapid  development  of, 
241 

Palassou,  Abbe,  early  geological  map 
by,  23 

Palissy's  views  regarding  fossil  shells, 
26 

Pallas,  P.  S.,  career  and  work  of,  80, 
285  ;  Cuvier's  Moge  of,  221 

Paris  basin,  Guettard's  early  obser- 
vations in  the,  19,  24  ;  influence 
of,  on  the  rise  of  stratigraphical 
geology,  208,  221 

Pascal,  37 

Pasumot,  59 

Pennant's  Tour  in  Scotland,  55 

Petrography,  early  condition  of,  91  ; 
rapid  growth  of,  in  the  latter  half 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  271,  275, 
286 

Phillips,  John,  224 

-  W.,  16 

Physical  geography,  early  writings 
on,  73 

Physiographical  geology,  early  obser- 
vations in,  28,  64  ;  slow  progress 
of,  286 

Playfair,  J.,  cited,  65,  151,  156,  159, 
164,  183,  192,  193,  285;  his 
Illustrations  of  the  Huttonian 
Theory,  159,  166  ;  on  veins,  177  ; 
on  the  origin  of  valleys,  180  ;  on 
glaciers,  181,  271  ;  disproves  the 
alleged  fossiliferous  character  of 
basalt  in  Antrim,  194  ;  on  geo- 
logical succession,  202 

Plutonists,  176 


Pocock,  R.,  54 

Pre-Cambrian  rocks,  269 

Primitive  rocks,  114,  121,  129,  130, 

245,  268 
Puy  de  Dome,  37,  57 

RAIN,  action  of,  28 

Ramond,  138 

Ramsay,  A.  C.,  181,  269,  282,  283,284 

Raspe  on  basalt,  78 

Rath,  G.  vom,  280 

Ray,  John,  5,  34 

Rhineland,  basalt  of,  53,  54,  65 

Rhinoceros,  fossil,  of  Siberia,  82 

Richardson,  B.,  230,  232 

W.,  194 

Rivers,  action  of,  28 

Rochefoucault,  Due  de,  50,  51 

Rogers,  H.  D.,  256 

Rome  de  Lisle,  55 

Rose,  Gustav,  280 

Rosenbusch,  Prof.  H.,  280 

Rouelle,  208 

Russia,  exploration  of,  by  Pallas,  79 

SAINTE-CLAIRE  DEVILLE,  C.  J.,  16 
Saussure,  H.  B.  de,  65  j  his  career 
and  work,  84  ;  his  love  of  flowers, 
85  ;  his  enthusiasm  for  the  Alps, 
85  ;  his  ideas  of  geological  struc- 
ture, 87,  89,  90 ;  first  uses  the  term 
Geology,  88  ;  on  the  use  of  fossils 
in  ascertaining  the  age  of  rocks,  90 ; 
his  experiments  in  the  fusion  of 
rocks,  91 ;  his  views  on  granite, 
175  ;  Cuvier's  filoge  of,  85,  221  ; 
referred  to,  285 
Saxony,  basalt  of,  53,  62,  65,  120, 

138,  145 
Scandinavia,  von  Buch  on  elevation 

of,  146 

Scotland,  basalt  of,  54,  198 
Scrope,  G.  P.,  16 
Sea,  action  of  the,  28,  30 
Sea-bottom,  nature  of  the,  31 
Sedgwick,   A.,  cited,  230,  237,  247, 
285  ;    birth   and  education,  256  ; 
elected    Woodwardian    Professor, 
256  ;  his  early  Wernerianism,  257 ; 
conjoint  work  with  Murchison,  258  ; 
labours  in  the  Lake  District,  258  ; 
in  Wales,  259  ;  estrangement  from 
Murchison,   261  ;    personal  traits, 
268 


296 


The  Founders  of  Geology 


Severinus,  Petrus,  cited,  6 
Siberia,  fossil  elephants  of,  81 
Silesia,  basalt  of,  53,  65,  145 
Silurian,  origin  of  the  term,  253 
Silurian  System,  publication  of,  255 
Smith,  William,  285,  286  ;  birth  and 
early  career,    224  ;    becomes  land- 
surveyor,  225  ;  his  early  geological 
observations,   226  ;    discovers  the 
stratigraphical  value  of  fossils,  228; 
his  card  of  the  English  strata,  230  ; 
establishes  himself  in  London  and 
begins  the  preparation  of  his  map 
of  England,  232 ;  character  of  his 
map,  233  ;    his  pecuniary  difficul- 
ties, 236  ;  his  death,  237  ;  personal 
traits,  237 
Soland,  Aime  de,  16 
Somma,  Monte,  dykes  of,  187 
Sorbonne,  action  of,  regarding  early 

geological  speculation,  12 
Sorby,  Mr.  H.  C.,  importance  of  his 
researches  in  modern  petrography, 
278,  286 

Spallanzani,  L.,  199 
Staffs,  55 
Steno,  5,  118,  120 
Stolpen,  basalt  of,  53,  120 
Stratigraphy,  rise  of,  201,  219,  244  ; 

rapid  advance  of,  241,  271 
Studer,  B.,  92 

THEOLOGIANS,  influence  of,  on  geo- 
logical progress,  7,  12 

Thuringer  Wald,  98 

Townsend,  J.,  230 

Transition  rocks,  114,  129,  245,  251 

Travel,  rise  of  the  spirit  of  scientific, 
79 

Trembly,  A.,  54 

Trilobites,  recognized  as  crustacean  by 
Guettard,  24  ;  figured  by  Lhuyd, 
25  ;  described  by  A.  Brongniart, 
213 

Trudaine,  51 

UNIFORMITARIANISM,  281,  288 
United  States,  progress  of  the  doc- 
trine of  valley- erosion  in,  181  ;  pre- 
Cambrian  rocks  of,  269 
Ural  Mountains,  84 

VALISNERI,  5 


Valleys,  origin  of,  64,  179 

Veins,    Werner   on,    127,   176,'  177  ; 

Hutton  on,  176 
Velay,  198 
Venetz,  271 

Venus,  transit  of,  in  1769,  79 
Verneuil,  E.  de,  256 
Vivarais,  198,  204 
Voigt,  J.  K.  W.,  122 
Volcanic  action,   early  ideas  ]of,  41, 

62  ;  Werner's  views  regarding,  123  ; 

Button's  opinion  respecting,  172  ; 

Hall's  observations  on,  187  ;  Mur- 

chison  on  ancient,  255  ;    Sedgwick 

on,  258 
Vulcanists,  117,  176,  201,  243 

WALES,  Palaeozoic  geology  of,  249, 
259 

Wallerius'  Mineralogia,  56,  91 

Webster,  T.,  239 

Werner,  A.  G.,  adopts  Guettard's 
volcanic  theory,  41,  62,  123  ;  his 
ideas  on  basalt,  78  ;  his  influence, 
102,  136,  137,  197,  199;  his 
connection  with  the  basalt-contro- 
versy, 103,  120,  124  ;  birth,  and 
education,  104  ;  his  first  work,  106; 
appointed  to  the  Mining  Academy 
of  Freiberg,  106,;  personal  traits  of, 
107,  134,  136 ;  characteristics  of 
his  teaching,  109  ;  his  sense  of 
method,  109  ;  his  relation  to 
mineralogy,  110,  275  ;  his  classifi- 
cation of  rocks,  113,  128 ;  on 
granite,  114,  129,  175  ;  his  dogma- 
tism, 115,  288  ;  his  doctrine  of  a 
former  universal  ocean,  114,  116, 
117,  131  ;  his  views  on  supposed 
disturbances  of  the  earth's  crust, 
120,  127  ;  his  theory  of  veins,  127, 
176,  177  ;  compelled  by  the  pro- 
gress of  discovery  to  modify  his 
system,  130  ;  his  relation  to  the 
doctrine  of  geological  succession, 
131,  201;  his  doctrines  influenced 
by'mining  experience,  131 ;  paucity 
of  his  writings,  133  ;  his  lectures, 
133,  134  ;  dislike  of  correspond- 
ence, 134  ;  death,  135,  197  ;  per- 
manent effects  of  his  teaching, 
136 

Wernerian  school,  its  explanation  of 
basalt,  43,  78  ;  its  doctrines,  109, 


Index 


297 


242  ;  its  relation  to  igneous  rocks, 
125  ;  reliance  upon  mining  experi- 
ence, 131 ;  obstructiveness  of,  132 ; 
decay  of,  136,  196,  257  ;  first 
serious  checks  to,  137,  144-146, 
147,  243 

Wernerian  Society,  193,  196 
Western  Isles  of  Scotland,  54 


Whinstone,   Hutton  on,  173  ;  Hall's 

experiments  on,  187 
Widenmann,  J.  F.  W.,  122 
Wiedemann,  137 
Witham,  H.,  277 
Woodward,  J.,  5 

ZIRKEL,  Dr.  F.,  280 


THE   END 


Printed  by  R.  &  R.  CLARK,  LIMITED,  Edinburgh 


T^V   A  •«  r    TT 


SE 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


** 


LD  21A-60m-3,'65 
(F2336slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


